> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2022 12:40 PM
> To: mattias.ronnblom <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>; Carrillo, Erik G
> <erik.g.carri...@intel.com>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S
> <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com>; Naga
> Harish K, S V <s.v.naga.haris...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>;
> hof...@lysator.liu.se; mattias.ronnblom <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/4] eventdev: have ethernet Rx adapter appropriately
> report idle
>
> @Harish, Could you review the patch ?
>
> -Jay
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mattias Rönnblom <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
> > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2022 8:24 PM
> > To: Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>; Carrillo, Erik G
> > <erik.g.carri...@intel.com>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S
> > <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>;
> > hof...@lysator.liu.se; mattias.ronnblom
> > <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH 2/4] eventdev: have ethernet Rx adapter appropriately
> > report idle
> >
> > Update the Event Ethernet Rx Adapter's service function to report as
> > idle (i.e., return -EAGAIN) in case no Ethernet frames were received
> > from the ethdev and no events were enqueued to the event device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mattias Rönnblom <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
> > ---
> > lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c | 56
> > ++++++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c
> > b/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c
> > index 5c3021a184..cf7bbd4d69 100644
> > --- a/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c
> > +++ b/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c
> > @@ -1184,7 +1184,7 @@ rxa_intr_thread(void *arg)
> > /* Dequeue <port, q> from interrupt ring and enqueue received
> > * mbufs to eventdev
> > */
> > -static inline void
> > +static inline bool
> > rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(struct event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter) {
> > uint32_t n;
> > @@ -1194,20 +1194,27 @@ rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(struct
> event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter)
> > struct rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_stats *stats;
> > rte_spinlock_t *ring_lock;
> > uint8_t max_done = 0;
> > + bool work = false;
> >
> > if (rx_adapter->num_rx_intr == 0)
> > - return;
> > + return work;
> >
> > if (rte_ring_count(rx_adapter->intr_ring) == 0
> > && !rx_adapter->qd_valid)
> > - return;
> > + return work;
> >
> > buf = &rx_adapter->event_enqueue_buffer;
> > stats = &rx_adapter->stats;
> > ring_lock = &rx_adapter->intr_ring_lock;
> >
> > - if (buf->count >= BATCH_SIZE)
> > - rxa_flush_event_buffer(rx_adapter, buf, stats);
> > + if (buf->count >= BATCH_SIZE) {
> > + uint16_t n;
> > +
> > + n = rxa_flush_event_buffer(rx_adapter, buf, stats);
> > +
> > + if (likely(n > 0))
> > + work = true;
> > + }
> >
> > while (rxa_pkt_buf_available(buf)) {
> > struct eth_device_info *dev_info;
> > @@ -1289,7 +1296,12 @@ rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(struct
> event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter)
> > }
> >
> > done:
> > - rx_adapter->stats.rx_intr_packets += nb_rx;
> > + if (nb_rx > 0) {
How are the performance numbers before and after this patch?
Trying to understand the performance impact, as new condition is added to the
service function Datapath.
> > + rx_adapter->stats.rx_intr_packets += nb_rx;
> > + work = true;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return work;
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1305,7 +1317,7 @@ rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(struct
> event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter)
> > * the hypervisor's switching layer where adjustments can be made to deal
> with
> > * it.
> > */
> > -static inline void
> > +static inline bool
> > rxa_poll(struct event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter) {
> > uint32_t num_queue;
> > @@ -1314,6 +1326,7 @@ rxa_poll(struct event_eth_rx_adapter
> *rx_adapter)
> > struct rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_stats *stats = NULL;
> > uint32_t wrr_pos;
> > uint32_t max_nb_rx;
> > + bool work = false;
> >
> > wrr_pos = rx_adapter->wrr_pos;
> > max_nb_rx = rx_adapter->max_nb_rx;
> > @@ -1329,14 +1342,20 @@ rxa_poll(struct event_eth_rx_adapter
> *rx_adapter)
> > /* Don't do a batch dequeue from the rx queue if there isn't
> > * enough space in the enqueue buffer.
> > */
> > - if (buf->count >= BATCH_SIZE)
> > - rxa_flush_event_buffer(rx_adapter, buf, stats);
> > + if (buf->count >= BATCH_SIZE) {
> > + uint16_t n;
> > +
> > + n = rxa_flush_event_buffer(rx_adapter, buf, stats);
> > +
> > + if (likely(n > 0))
> > + work = true;
Same as above
> > + }
> > if (!rxa_pkt_buf_available(buf)) {
> > if (rx_adapter->use_queue_event_buf)
> > goto poll_next_entry;
> > else {
> > rx_adapter->wrr_pos = wrr_pos;
> > - return;
> > + break;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1352,6 +1371,11 @@ rxa_poll(struct event_eth_rx_adapter
> *rx_adapter)
> > if (++wrr_pos == rx_adapter->wrr_len)
> > wrr_pos = 0;
> > }
> > +
> > + if (nb_rx > 0)
> > + work = true;
> > +
> > + return work;
Same as above
> > }
> >
> > static void
> > @@ -1384,12 +1408,14 @@ static int
> > rxa_service_func(void *args)
> > {
> > struct event_eth_rx_adapter *rx_adapter = args;
> > + bool intr_work;
> > + bool poll_work;
> >
> > if (rte_spinlock_trylock(&rx_adapter->rx_lock) == 0)
> > - return 0;
> > + return -EAGAIN;
> > if (!rx_adapter->rxa_started) {
> > rte_spinlock_unlock(&rx_adapter->rx_lock);
> > - return 0;
> > + return -EAGAIN;
> > }
> >
> > if (rx_adapter->ena_vector) {
> > @@ -1410,12 +1436,12 @@ rxa_service_func(void *args)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(rx_adapter);
> > - rxa_poll(rx_adapter);
> > + intr_work = rxa_intr_ring_dequeue(rx_adapter);
> > + poll_work = rxa_poll(rx_adapter);
> >
> > rte_spinlock_unlock(&rx_adapter->rx_lock);
> >
> > - return 0;
> > + return intr_work || poll_work ? 0 : -EAGAIN;
> > }
> >
> > static void *
> > --
> > 2.34.1
