On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 19:08 +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 6:55 PM Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 18:28 +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 5:07 PM Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 15:05 +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Xueming(Steven) Li > > > > > <xuemi...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2021-08-11 at 13:04 +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > > > > > On 8/11/2021 9:28 AM, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2021 4:03 PM > > > > > > > > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > > > > > > > > > Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Ferruh Yigit > > > > > > > > > <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > > > > <tho...@monjalon.net>; > > > > > > > > > Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] ethdev: introduce shared > > > > > > > > > Rx queue > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 7:46 PM Xueming(Steven) Li > > > > > > > > > <xuemi...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 9:51 PM > > > > > > > > > > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Ferruh Yigit > > > > > > > > > > > <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; > > > > > > > > > > > NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > Rybchenko > > > > > > > > > > > <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] ethdev: introduce > > > > > > > > > > > shared Rx queue > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 5:18 PM Xueming Li > > > > > > > > > > > <xuemi...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In current DPDK framework, each RX queue is pre-loaded > > > > > > > > > > > > with mbufs > > > > > > > > > > > > for incoming packets. When number of representors scale > > > > > > > > > > > > out in a > > > > > > > > > > > > switch domain, the memory consumption became > > > > > > > > > > > > significant. Most > > > > > > > > > > > > important, polling all ports leads to high cache miss, > > > > > > > > > > > > high > > > > > > > > > > > > latency and low throughput. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch introduces shared RX queue. Ports with same > > > > > > > > > > > > configuration in a switch domain could share RX queue > > > > > > > > > > > > set by specifying sharing group. > > > > > > > > > > > > Polling any queue using same shared RX queue receives > > > > > > > > > > > > packets from > > > > > > > > > > > > all member ports. Source port is identified by > > > > > > > > > > > > mbuf->port. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Port queue number in a shared group should be > > > > > > > > > > > > identical. Queue > > > > > > > > > > > > index is > > > > > > > > > > > > 1:1 mapped in shared group. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Share RX queue is supposed to be polled on same thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Multiple groups is supported by group ID. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this offload specific to the representor? If so can > > > > > > > > > > > this name be changed specifically to representor? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, PF and representor in switch domain could take > > > > > > > > > > advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If it is for a generic case, how the flow ordering will > > > > > > > > > > > be maintained? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not quite sure that I understood your question. The control > > > > > > > > > > path of is > > > > > > > > > > almost same as before, PF and representor port still > > > > > > > > > > needed, rte flows not impacted. > > > > > > > > > > Queues still needed for each member port, descriptors(mbuf) > > > > > > > > > > will be > > > > > > > > > > supplied from shared Rx queue in my PMD implementation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My question was if create a generic > > > > > > > > > RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SHARED_RXQ offload, multiple ethdev > > > > > > > > > receive queues land into the same > > > > > > > > > receive queue, In that case, how the flow order is maintained > > > > > > > > > for respective receive queues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the question is testpmd forward stream? The forwarding > > > > > > > > logic has to be changed slightly in case of shared rxq. > > > > > > > > basically for each packet in rx_burst result, lookup source > > > > > > > > stream according to mbuf->port, forwarding to target fs. > > > > > > > > Packets from same source port could be grouped as a small burst > > > > > > > > to process, this will accelerates the performance if traffic > > > > > > > > come from > > > > > > > > limited ports. I'll introduce some common api to do shard rxq > > > > > > > > forwarding, call it with packets handling callback, so it > > > > > > > > suites for > > > > > > > > all forwarding engine. Will sent patches soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All ports will put the packets in to the same queue (share > > > > > > > queue), right? Does > > > > > > > this means only single core will poll only, what will happen if > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > multiple cores polling, won't it cause problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And if this requires specific changes in the application, I am > > > > > > > not sure about > > > > > > > the solution, can't this work in a transparent way to the > > > > > > > application? > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussed with Jerin, new API introduced in v3 2/8 that aggregate > > > > > > ports > > > > > > in same group into one new port. Users could schedule polling on the > > > > > > aggregated port instead of all member ports. > > > > > > > > > > The v3 still has testpmd changes in fastpath. Right? IMO, For this > > > > > feature, we should not change fastpath of testpmd > > > > > application. Instead, testpmd can use aggregated ports probably as > > > > > separate fwd_engine to show how to use this feature. > > > > > > > > Good point to discuss :) There are two strategies to polling a shared > > > > Rxq: > > > > 1. polling each member port > > > > All forwarding engines can be reused to work as before. > > > > My testpmd patches are efforts towards this direction. > > > > Does your PMD support this? > > > > > > Not unfortunately. More than that, every application needs to change > > > to support this model. > > > > Both strategies need user application to resolve port ID from mbuf and > > process accordingly. > > This one doesn't demand aggregated port, no polling schedule change. > > I was thinking, mbuf will be updated from driver/aggregator port as when it > comes to application. > > > > > > > > > > 2. polling aggregated port > > > > Besides forwarding engine, need more work to to demo it. > > > > This is an optional API, not supported by my PMD yet. > > > > > > We are thinking of implementing this PMD when it comes to it, ie. > > > without application change in fastpath > > > logic. > > > > Fastpath have to resolve port ID anyway and forwarding according to > > logic. Forwarding engine need to adapt to support shard Rxq. > > Fortunately, in testpmd, this can be done with an abstract API. > > > > Let's defer part 2 until some PMD really support it and tested, how do > > you think? > > We are not planning to use this feature so either way it is OK to me. > I leave to ethdev maintainers decide between 1 vs 2.
A better driver should support both, but specific driver could select either one. 1 brings less changes to application, 2 brings better performance with additional steps. > > I do have a strong opinion not changing the testpmd basic forward engines > for this feature.I would like to keep it simple as fastpath optimized and > would > like to add a separate Forwarding engine as means to verify this feature. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Overall, is this for optimizing memory for the port represontors? > > > > > > > If so can't we > > > > > > > have a port representor specific solution, reducing scope can > > > > > > > reduce the > > > > > > > complexity it brings? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If this offload is only useful for representor case, Can we > > > > > > > > > make this offload specific to representor the case by > > > > > > > > > changing its name and > > > > > > > > > scope. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It works for both PF and representors in same switch domain, > > > > > > > > for application like OVS, few changes to apply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > doc/guides/nics/features.rst | 11 > > > > > > > > > > > > +++++++++++ > > > > > > > > > > > > doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini | 1 + > > > > > > > > > > > > doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst | 10 > > > > > > > > > > > > ++++++++++ > > > > > > > > > > > > lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 1 + > > > > > > > > > > > > lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 7 > > > > > > > > > > > > +++++++ > > > > > > > > > > > > 5 files changed, 30 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst index > > > > > > > > > > > > a96e12d155..2e2a9b1554 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -624,6 +624,17 @@ Supports inner packet L4 checksum. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``tx_offload_capa,tx_queue_offload_capa:DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM``. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +.. _nic_features_shared_rx_queue: > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > +Shared Rx queue > > > > > > > > > > > > +--------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > +Supports shared Rx queue for ports in same switch > > > > > > > > > > > > domain. > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > +* **[uses] rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**: > > > > > > > > > > > > ``offloads:RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SHARED_RXQ``. > > > > > > > > > > > > +* **[provides] mbuf**: ``mbuf.port``. > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > .. _nic_features_packet_type_parsing: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Packet type parsing > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini > > > > > > > > > > > > b/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini > > > > > > > > > > > > index 754184ddd4..ebeb4c1851 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ Free Tx mbuf on demand = > > > > > > > > > > > > Queue start/stop = > > > > > > > > > > > > Runtime Rx queue setup = > > > > > > > > > > > > Runtime Tx queue setup = > > > > > > > > > > > > +Shared Rx queue = > > > > > > > > > > > > Burst mode info = > > > > > > > > > > > > Power mgmt address monitor = > > > > > > > > > > > > MTU update = > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > > > > > > > > > a/doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > b/doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > index ff6aa91c80..45bf5a3a10 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -123,6 +123,16 @@ thought as a software "patch > > > > > > > > > > > > panel" front-end for applications. > > > > > > > > > > > > .. [1] `Ethernet switch device driver model (switchdev) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > `_ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +- Memory usage of representors is huge when number of > > > > > > > > > > > > representor > > > > > > > > > > > > +grows, > > > > > > > > > > > > + because PMD always allocate mbuf for each descriptor > > > > > > > > > > > > of Rx queue. > > > > > > > > > > > > + Polling the large number of ports brings more CPU > > > > > > > > > > > > load, cache > > > > > > > > > > > > +miss and > > > > > > > > > > > > + latency. Shared Rx queue can be used to share Rx > > > > > > > > > > > > queue between > > > > > > > > > > > > +PF and > > > > > > > > > > > > + representors in same switch domain. > > > > > > > > > > > > +``RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SHARED_RXQ`` > > > > > > > > > > > > + is present in Rx offloading capability of device > > > > > > > > > > > > info. Setting > > > > > > > > > > > > +the > > > > > > > > > > > > + offloading flag in device Rx mode or Rx queue > > > > > > > > > > > > configuration to > > > > > > > > > > > > +enable > > > > > > > > > > > > + shared Rx queue. Polling any member port of shared > > > > > > > > > > > > Rx queue can > > > > > > > > > > > > +return > > > > > > > > > > > > + packets of all ports in group, port ID is saved in > > > > > > > > > > > > ``mbuf.port``. > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > Basic SR-IOV > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c > > > > > > > > > > > > b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c > > > > > > > > > > > > index 9d95cd11e1..1361ff759a 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -127,6 +127,7 @@ static const struct { > > > > > > > > > > > > RTE_RX_OFFLOAD_BIT2STR(OUTER_UDP_CKSUM), > > > > > > > > > > > > RTE_RX_OFFLOAD_BIT2STR(RSS_HASH), > > > > > > > > > > > > RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BIT2STR(BUFFER_SPLIT), > > > > > > > > > > > > + RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BIT2STR(SHARED_RXQ), > > > > > > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #undef RTE_RX_OFFLOAD_BIT2STR > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > > > > > > > > > > > b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > > > > > > > > > > > index d2b27c351f..a578c9db9d 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1047,6 +1047,7 @@ struct rte_eth_rxconf { > > > > > > > > > > > > uint8_t rx_drop_en; /**< Drop packets if no > > > > > > > > > > > > descriptors are available. */ > > > > > > > > > > > > uint8_t rx_deferred_start; /**< Do not start > > > > > > > > > > > > queue with rte_eth_dev_start(). */ > > > > > > > > > > > > uint16_t rx_nseg; /**< Number of descriptions > > > > > > > > > > > > in rx_seg array. > > > > > > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint32_t shared_group; /**< Shared port group > > > > > > > > > > > > index in > > > > > > > > > > > > + switch domain. */ > > > > > > > > > > > > /** > > > > > > > > > > > > * Per-queue Rx offloads to be set using > > > > > > > > > > > > DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_* flags. > > > > > > > > > > > > * Only offloads set on rx_queue_offload_capa or > > > > > > > > > > > > rx_offload_capa @@ -1373,6 +1374,12 @@ struct > > > > > > > > > > > > rte_eth_conf { > > > > > > > > > > > > #define DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM 0x00040000 > > > > > > > > > > > > #define DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH > > > > > > > > > > > > 0x00080000 > > > > > > > > > > > > #define RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT 0x00100000 > > > > > > > > > > > > +/** > > > > > > > > > > > > + * Rx queue is shared among ports in same switch > > > > > > > > > > > > domain to save > > > > > > > > > > > > +memory, > > > > > > > > > > > > + * avoid polling each port. Any port in group can be > > > > > > > > > > > > used to receive packets. > > > > > > > > > > > > + * Real source port number saved in mbuf->port field. > > > > > > > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SHARED_RXQ 0x00200000 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #define DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM > > > > > > > > > > > > (DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | \ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM | \ > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
