On 2020/6/23 17:30, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 6/23/20 9:48 AM, Chengchang Tang wrote:
>> In common practice, PMD configure the rx_buf_size according to the data
>> room size of the object in mempool. But in fact the final value is related
>> to the specifications of hw, and its values will affect the number of
>> fragments in recieving pkts.
>>
>> At present, we seem to have no way to espose relevant information to upper
>> layer users.
>>
>> Add a field named rx_bufsize in rte_eth_rxq_info to indicate the buffer
>> size used in recieving pkts for hw.
>>
>
> I'm OK with the change in general.
> I'm unsure which name to use: 'rx_buf_size' or 'rx_bursize',
> since I found both 'min_rx_buf_size' and 'min_rx_bufsize' in
> ethdev.
>
> I think it is important to update PMDs which provides the
> information to fill the field in.
My plan is to divide the subsequent series into two patches,
one to modify rte_eth_rxq_info, and one to add our hns3 PMD
implementation of rxq_info_get. Should i update all the PMDs
that provide this information and test programs such as
testpmd at the same time?
>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengch...@huawei.com>
>
> Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>
>
>> ---
>> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
>> index 0f6d053..82b7e98 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
>> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
>> @@ -1306,6 +1306,7 @@ struct rte_eth_rxq_info {
>> struct rte_eth_rxconf conf; /**< queue config parameters. */
>> uint8_t scattered_rx; /**< scattered packets RX supported. */
>> uint16_t nb_desc; /**< configured number of RXDs. */
>> + uint16_t rx_bufsize; /**< size of RX buffer. */
>> } __rte_cache_min_aligned;
>>
>> /**
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
>
>
> .
>
