Thanks Chenbo for your comments.
Replies are inline.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 2:03 PM
> To: Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: maxime.coque...@redhat.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 2/3] vhost: rework async configuration struct
>
> Hi Jiayu,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 3:46 PM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: maxime.coque...@redhat.com; Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>;
> > Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] vhost: rework async configuration struct
>
> Struct -> structure
>
> >
> > This patch reworks the async configuration structure to improve code
> > readability. In addition, add preserved padding fields on the
> > structure for future usage.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiayu Hu <jiayu...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > doc/guides/prog_guide/vhost_lib.rst | 19 +++++++++++--------
> > examples/vhost/main.c | 8 ++++----
> > lib/vhost/rte_vhost_async.h | 35
> > +++++++++++++++++------------------
> > lib/vhost/vhost.c | 13 +++++--------
> > 4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/vhost_lib.rst
> > b/doc/guides/prog_guide/vhost_lib.rst
> > index d18fb98..affdc57 100644
> > --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/vhost_lib.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/vhost_lib.rst
> > @@ -218,26 +218,29 @@ The following is an overview of some key Vhost
> > API
> > functions:
> >
> > Enable or disable zero copy feature of the vhost crypto backend.
> >
> > -* ``rte_vhost_async_channel_register(vid, queue_id, features, ops)``
> > +* ``rte_vhost_async_channel_register(vid, queue_id, config, ops)``
> >
> > Register a vhost queue with async copy device channel after vring
>
> Not related to this patch. But maybe 'Register an async copy device channel
> for a vhost queue' is better?
>
> > - is enabled. Following device ``features`` must be specified
> > together
> > + is enabled. Following device ``config`` must be specified together
> > with the registration:
> >
> > - * ``async_inorder``
> > + * ``features``
> >
> > - Async copy device can guarantee the ordering of copy completion
> > - sequence. Copies are completed in the same order with that at
> > - the submission time.
> > + This field is used to specify async copy device features.
> >
> > - Currently, only ``async_inorder`` capable device is supported by vhost.
> > + ``RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_INORDER`` represents the async copy device can
> > + guarantee the order of copy completion is the same as the order
> > + of copy submission.
> > +
> > + Currently, only ``RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_INORDER`` capable device is
> > + supported by vhost.
> >
> > * ``async_threshold``
> >
> > The copy length (in bytes) below which CPU copy will be used even if
> > applications call async vhost APIs to enqueue/dequeue data.
> >
> > - Typical value is 512~1024 depending on the async device capability.
> > + Typical value is 256~1024 depending on the async device capability.
> >
> > Applications must provide following ``ops`` callbacks for vhost lib to
> > work with the async copy devices:
> > diff --git a/examples/vhost/main.c b/examples/vhost/main.c index
> > d2179ea..9cd855a 100644
> > --- a/examples/vhost/main.c
> > +++ b/examples/vhost/main.c
> > @@ -1468,7 +1468,7 @@ new_device(int vid)
> > vid, vdev->coreid);
> >
> > if (async_vhost_driver) {
> > - struct rte_vhost_async_features f;
> > + struct rte_vhost_async_config config = {0};
> > struct rte_vhost_async_channel_ops channel_ops;
> >
> > if (dma_type != NULL && strncmp(dma_type, "ioat", 4) == 0)
> { @@
> > -1476,11 +1476,11 @@ new_device(int vid)
> > channel_ops.check_completed_copies =
> > ioat_check_completed_copies_cb;
> >
> > - f.async_inorder = 1;
> > - f.async_threshold = 256;
> > + config.features = RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_INORDER;
> > + config.async_threshold = 256;
>
> This is ok as for now we are using ioat API. But I guess there should be a
> more user-friendly way to know the value. I mean, no users want to do
> complicated tests for his platform to know the value. Maybe there could be
> some auto-test in specific driver to show the value to user?
It's hard in a way, as it's not only related to platform, but also application
logics.
So I think better to keep it as an input from users, before we have a good idea
😊
>
> It's off-topic for this patch. But thinking about it should be good.
>
> >
> > return rte_vhost_async_channel_register(vid,
> VIRTIO_RXQ,
> > - f.intval, &channel_ops);
> > + config, &channel_ops);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/vhost/rte_vhost_async.h b/lib/vhost/rte_vhost_async.h
> > index 6faa31f..c93490d 100644
> > --- a/lib/vhost/rte_vhost_async.h
> > +++ b/lib/vhost/rte_vhost_async.h
> > @@ -93,18 +93,20 @@ struct async_inflight_info { };
> >
> > /**
> > - * dma channel feature bit definition
> > + * dma channel features
>
> Let's use 'async channel' which is also the name for API.
> It's always good to use one term for one thing.
Sure, I will fix that.
>
> > */
> > -struct rte_vhost_async_features {
> > - union {
> > - uint32_t intval;
> > - struct {
> > - uint32_t async_inorder:1;
> > - uint32_t resvd_0:15;
> > - uint32_t async_threshold:12;
> > - uint32_t resvd_1:4;
> > - };
> > - };
> > +enum {
> > + RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_FEATURE_UNKNOWN = 0U,
> > + RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_INORDER = 1U << 0,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * dma channel configuration
>
> Ditto
>
> > + */
> > +struct rte_vhost_async_config {
> > + uint32_t async_threshold;
> > + uint32_t features;
> > + uint32_t resvd[2];
>
> Generally we use 'rsvd' for the word 'reserved'.
>
> > };
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -114,12 +116,8 @@ struct rte_vhost_async_features {
> > * vhost device id async channel to be attached to
> > * @param queue_id
> > * vhost queue id async channel to be attached to
> > - * @param features
> > - * DMA channel feature bit
> > - * b0 : DMA supports inorder data transfer
> > - * b1 - b15: reserved
> > - * b16 - b27: Packet length threshold for DMA transfer
> > - * b28 - b31: reserved
> > + * @param config
> > + * DMA channel configuration structure
>
> DMA -> async
>
> > * @param ops
> > * DMA operation callbacks
> > * @return
> > @@ -127,7 +125,8 @@ struct rte_vhost_async_features {
> > */
> > __rte_experimental
> > int rte_vhost_async_channel_register(int vid, uint16_t queue_id,
> > - uint32_t features, struct rte_vhost_async_channel_ops *ops);
> > + struct rte_vhost_async_config config,
> > + struct rte_vhost_async_channel_ops *ops);
> >
> > /**
> > * unregister a dma channel for vhost diff --git a/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> > b/lib/vhost/vhost.c index 53a470f..a20f05a 100644
> > --- a/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> > +++ b/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> > @@ -1620,18 +1620,15 @@ int rte_vhost_extern_callback_register(int
> > vid, }
> >
> > int rte_vhost_async_channel_register(int vid, uint16_t queue_id,
> > - uint32_t features,
> > - struct rte_vhost_async_channel_ops
> *ops)
> > + struct rte_vhost_async_config config,
> > + struct rte_vhost_async_channel_ops *ops)
> > {
> > struct vhost_virtqueue *vq;
> > struct virtio_net *dev = get_device(vid);
> > - struct rte_vhost_async_features f;
> >
> > if (dev == NULL || ops == NULL)
> > return -1;
> >
> > - f.intval = features;
> > -
> > if (queue_id >= VHOST_MAX_VRING)
> > return -1;
> >
> > @@ -1640,7 +1637,7 @@ int rte_vhost_async_channel_register(int vid,
> > uint16_t queue_id,
> > if (unlikely(vq == NULL || !dev->async_copy))
> > return -1;
> >
> > - if (unlikely(!f.async_inorder)) {
> > + if (unlikely(!(config.features & RTE_VHOST_ASYNC_INORDER))) {
> > VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(ERR,
> > "async copy is not supported on non-inorder mode "
> > "(vid %d, qid: %d)\n", vid, queue_id); @@ -1720,8
> +1717,8 @@ int
> > rte_vhost_async_channel_register(int vid, uint16_t queue_id,
> > vq->async_ops.check_completed_copies = ops-
> >check_completed_copies;
> > vq->async_ops.transfer_data = ops->transfer_data;
> >
> > - vq->async_inorder = f.async_inorder;
> > - vq->async_threshold = f.async_threshold;
> > + vq->async_inorder = true;
>
> Do we still need this? It's never used.
I think we need to keep it, as we may support out-of-order channel in future.
>
> > + vq->async_threshold = config.async_threshold;
>
> vq->async_threshold is uint16_t and config.async_threshold is uint32_t.
> They should be the same.
I will change vq->async_threshold to uint32_t.
Thanks,
Jiayu
>
> Thanks,
> Chenbo
>
> >
> > vq->async_registered = true;
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
>
