在 2023/11/27 23:43, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
On 11/27/2023 1:12 PM, lihuisong (C) wrote:
在 2023/11/27 20:19, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
On 11/25/2023 1:47 AM, Huisong Li wrote:
Add hash algorithm feature introduced by 23.11 and fix some RSS features
description.
Fixes: 34ff088cc241 ("ethdev: set and query RSS hash algorithm")
Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuis...@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Chengwen Feng <fengcheng...@huawei.com>
---
doc/guides/nics/features.rst | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
index 1a1dc16c1e..0d38c5c525 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
@@ -277,10 +277,12 @@ RSS hash
Supports RSS hashing on RX.
* **[uses] user config**: ``dev_conf.rxmode.mq_mode`` =
``RTE_ETH_MQ_RX_RSS_FLAG``.
-* **[uses] user config**: ``dev_conf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf``.
+* **[uses] user config**: ``rss_conf.rss_hf``.
Feature title is "RSS hash", it can be two things,
1. "Receive Side Scaling" support
2. Provide RSS hash to application
When this document first prepared RSS hash value was always provided to
the application when RSS enabled.
So intention with this feature was "Receive Side Scaling" support, hence
'RTE_ETH_MQ_RX_RSS_FLAG' added.
Later providing RSS has to the application separated as optimization,
'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' & 'RTE_MBUF_F_RX_RSS_HASH' added for this
support.
What should I do for above two comments？
To tell application how to use it?
Just tried to give some context.
got it.
As the intention of this feature is "Receive Side Scaling" support, we
shouldn't reduce configuration struct to 'rss_conf.rss_hf'.
Instead perhaps can expand to:
'rte_eth_conf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf', 'rte_eth_rss_conf'
I just pick their common part.😁
ok, will fix it.
* **[uses] rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**:
``offloads:RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH``.
* **[provides] rte_eth_dev_info**: ``flow_type_rss_offloads``.
* **[provides] mbuf**: ``mbuf.ol_flags:RTE_MBUF_F_RX_RSS_HASH``,
``mbuf.rss``.
+* **[related] API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``,
``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update``
+ ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``.
ack
.. _nic_features_inner_rss:
@@ -288,7 +290,7 @@ Supports RSS hashing on RX.
Inner RSS
---------
-Supports RX RSS hashing on Inner headers.
+Supports RX RSS hashing on Inner headers by rte_flow API.
This should be clarified with details below, not sure if it required to
limit description to rte_flow.
But this block like rte_flow_action_rss is from rte_flow.
And ethdev ops doesn't support inner RSS.
So I think it is ok.
Yes it is supported by rte_flow, and '[uses]' information should already
clarify it.
Should we remove the 'rte_flow API' wrods I added in above description?
And I guess similar confusion exist with the providing hash to user.
Need to check if rte_flow implementation puts hash to mbuf along with
doing the RSS, or if it checks 'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' offload,
and update below items accordingly.
Do we need to tell user how to use it here?
I feel this document is a little simple and main to list interface for
user.
In addition, it is better that the more detail about RSS should be
presented in rte_flow features.
No, I am not suggesting to add more detail.
My concern is 'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' information may not be
correct, ethdev APIs checks offload flags, but does rte_flow
implementation check it?
As far as I know, It is possibly verified in PMD if have or required.
My suggestion is double check that piece of information and fix it if
required.
* **[uses] rte_flow_action_rss**: ``level``.
* **[uses] rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**:
``offloads:RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH``.
@@ -303,9 +305,25 @@ RSS key update
Supports configuration of Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash
computation. Updating
Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash key.
-* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``rss_hash_update``,
``rss_hash_conf_get``.
+* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``dev_configure``,
``rss_hash_update``, ``rss_hash_conf_get``.
+* **[uses] user config**: ``rss_conf.rss_key``,
``rss_conf.rss_key_len``
* **[provides] rte_eth_dev_info**: ``hash_key_size``.
-* **[related] API**: ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``,
+* **[related] API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``,
``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``,
+ ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``.
+
ack
There is an inconsistency in the documentation but I think it is good to
use '()' when documenting API, like: 'rte_eth_dev_configure()'
+1 will fix it.
+
+.. _nic_features_rss_hash_algo_update:
+
+RSS hash algorithm update
+-------------------------
+
+Supports configuration of Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash algorithm.
Updating
+RSS hash algorithm.
+
+* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``dev_configure``,
``rss_hash_update``, ``rss_hash_conf_get``.
+* **[uses] user config**: ``rss_conf.algorithm``
+* **[provides] rte_eth_dev_info**: ``rss_algo_capa``.
+* **[related] API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``,
``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``,
``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``.
This document describes features listed in the 'default.ini', so we
shouldn't have above.
And I don't think RSS hash algorithm update is a big enough feature to
list in the feature list, perhaps it can be embedded in the RSS support
block, what do you think?
Yes it is not a bit feature.
so put it to RSS hash, right?
Yes please.
.
