On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 2:40 AM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote: > > On 1/27/2022 7:13 AM, Sunil Kumar Kori wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 11:07 PM > >> To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jer...@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Xiaoyun > >> Li <xiaoyun...@intel.com>; Aman Singh <aman.deep.si...@intel.com>; Yuying > >> Zhang <yuying.zh...@intel.com> > >> Cc: tho...@monjalon.net; ajit.khapa...@broadcom.com; > >> abo...@pensando.io; andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru; > >> beilei.x...@intel.com; bruce.richard...@intel.com; ch...@att.com; > >> chenbo....@intel.com; ciara.lof...@intel.com; Devendra Singh Rawat > >> <dsinghra...@marvell.com>; ed.cz...@atomicrules.com; > >> evge...@amazon.com; gr...@u256.net; g.si...@nxp.com; > >> zhouguoy...@huawei.com; haiyue.w...@intel.com; Harman Kalra > >> <hka...@marvell.com>; heinrich.k...@corigine.com; > >> hemant.agra...@nxp.com; hyon...@cisco.com; igo...@amazon.com; Igor > >> Russkikh <irussk...@marvell.com>; jgraj...@cisco.com; > >> jasvinder.si...@intel.com; jianw...@trustnetic.com; > >> jiawe...@trustnetic.com; jingjing...@intel.com; johnd...@cisco.com; > >> john.mil...@atomicrules.com; linvi...@tuxdriver.com; keith.wi...@intel.com; > >> Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda <kirankum...@marvell.com>; > >> ouli...@huawei.com; Liron Himi <lir...@marvell.com>; > >> lon...@microsoft.com; m...@semihalf.com; spin...@cesnet.cz; > >> ma...@nvidia.com; matt.pet...@windriver.com; > >> maxime.coque...@redhat.com; m...@semihalf.com; humi...@huawei.com; > >> Pradeep Kumar Nalla <pna...@marvell.com>; Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram > >> <ndabilpu...@marvell.com>; qiming.y...@intel.com; qi.z.zh...@intel.com; > >> Radha Chintakuntla <rad...@marvell.com>; rahul.lakkire...@chelsio.com; > >> Rasesh Mody <rm...@marvell.com>; rosen...@intel.com; > >> sachin.sax...@oss.nxp.com; Satha Koteswara Rao Kottidi > >> <skotesh...@marvell.com>; Shahed Shaikh <shsha...@marvell.com>; > >> shaib...@amazon.com; shepard.sie...@atomicrules.com; > >> asoma...@amd.com; somnath.ko...@broadcom.com; > >> sthem...@microsoft.com; steven.webs...@windriver.com; Sunil Kumar Kori > >> <sk...@marvell.com>; mtetsu...@gmail.com; Veerasenareddy Burru > >> <vbu...@marvell.com>; viachesl...@nvidia.com; xiao.w.w...@intel.com; > >> cloud.wangxiao...@huawei.com; yisen.zhu...@huawei.com; > >> yongw...@vmware.com; xuanziya...@huawei.com > >> Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] app/testpmd: add queue based > >> pfc CLI options > >> > >> External Email > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> On 1/13/2022 10:27 AM, jer...@marvell.com wrote: > >>> From: Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com> > >>> > >>> Patch adds command line options to configure queue based priority flow > >>> control. > >>> > >>> - Syntax command is given as below: > >>> > >>> set pfc_queue_ctrl <port_id> rx <on|off> <tx_qid> <tx_tc> \ > >>> tx <on|off> <rx_qid> <rx_tc> <pause_time> > >>> > >> > >> Isn't the order of the paramters odd, it is mixing Rx/Tx config, what about > >> ordering Rx and Tx paramters? > >> > > It's been kept like this to portray config for rx_pause and tx_pause > > separately i.e. mode and corresponding config. > > > > What do you mean 'separately'? You need to provide all arguments anyway, > right? > > I was thinking first have the Rx arguments, later Tx, like: > > rx <on|off> <rx_qid> <rx_tc> tx <on|off> <tx_qid> <tx_tc> <pause_time> I think this grouping is better.
> > Am I missing something, is there a benefit of what you did in this patch? > > >>> - Example command to configure queue based priority flow control > >>> on rx and tx side for port 0, Rx queue 0, Tx queue 0 with pause > >>> time 2047 > >>> > >>> testpmd> set pfc_queue_ctrl 0 rx on 0 0 tx on 0 0 2047 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com> > >> > >> <...> >
