> -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang, Qi Z > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 12:52 AM > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing > <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred queue setup > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:22 PM > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing > > <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred queue > > setup > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zhang, Qi Z > > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 2:30 PM > > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; > > > tho...@monjalon.net > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing > > > <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred queue > > > setup > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 9:23 PM > > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing > > > > <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred > > > > queue setup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Zhang, Qi Z > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 3:22 AM > > > > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; > > > > > tho...@monjalon.net > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, > > > > > Jingjing <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo > > > > > <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred > > > > > queue setup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:36 PM > > > > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, > > > > > > Jingjing <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo > > > > > > <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred > > > > > > queue setup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Qi Zhang > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 4:13 AM > > > > > > > To: tho...@monjalon.net > > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Wu, > > > > > > > Jingjing <jingjing...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo > > > > > > > <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Zhang, > > > > > > Qi > > > > > > > Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com> > > > > > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/i40e: enable deferred > > > > > > > queue setup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Expose the deferred queue configuration capability and enhance > > > > > > > i40e_dev_[rx|tx]_queue_[setup|release] to handle the situation > > > > > > > when device already started. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 6 ++++ > > > > > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 62 > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > > > > > b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c index 06b0f03a1..843a0c42a > > > > > > > 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > > > > > @@ -3195,6 +3195,12 @@ i40e_dev_info_get(struct rte_eth_dev > > > > *dev, > > > > > > struct rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info) > > > > > > > DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO | > > > > > > > DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO | > > > > > > > DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO; > > > > > > > + dev_info->deferred_queue_config_capa = > > > > > > > + DEV_DEFERRED_RX_QUEUE_SETUP | > > > > > > > + DEV_DEFERRED_TX_QUEUE_SETUP | > > > > > > > + DEV_DEFERRED_RX_QUEUE_RELEASE | > > > > > > > + DEV_DEFERRED_TX_QUEUE_RELEASE; > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > dev_info->hash_key_size = (I40E_PFQF_HKEY_MAX_INDEX + > > 1) * > > > > > > > sizeof(uint32_t); > > > > > > > dev_info->reta_size = pf->hash_lut_size; diff --git > > > > > > > a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c > > > > > > > index > > > > > > > 1217e5a61..e5f532cf7 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c > > > > > > > @@ -1712,6 +1712,7 @@ i40e_dev_rx_queue_setup(struct > > > > rte_eth_dev > > > > > > *dev, > > > > > > > uint16_t len, i; > > > > > > > uint16_t reg_idx, base, bsf, tc_mapping; > > > > > > > int q_offset, use_def_burst_func = 1; > > > > > > > + int ret = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (hw->mac.type == I40E_MAC_VF || hw->mac.type == > > > > > > I40E_MAC_X722_VF) { > > > > > > > vf = > > I40EVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(dev->data->dev_private); > > > > > > > @@ -1841,6 +1842,25 @@ i40e_dev_rx_queue_setup(struct > > > > rte_eth_dev > > > > > > *dev, > > > > > > > rxq->dcb_tc = i; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (dev->data->dev_started) { > > > > > > > + ret = i40e_rx_queue_init(rxq); > > > > > > > + if (ret != I40E_SUCCESS) { > > > > > > > + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, > > > > > > > + "Failed to do RX queue > > > > > > > initialization"); > > > > > > > + return ret; > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + if (ad->rx_vec_allowed) > > > > > > > > > > > > Better to check what rx function is installed right now. > > > > > Yes, it should be fixed, need to return fail if any conflict > > > > > > > > > > > > > + i40e_rxq_vec_setup(rxq); > > > > > > > + if (!rxq->rx_deferred_start) { > > > > > > > + ret = i40e_dev_rx_queue_start(dev, queue_idx); > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it is a good idea to start/stop queue inside > > > > > > queue_setup/queue_release. > > > > > > There is special API (queue_start/queue_stop) to do this. > > > > > > > > > > The idea is if dev already started, the queue is supposed to be > > > > > started > > > > automatically after queue_setup. > > > > > > > > Why is that? > > > Because device is already started, its like a running conveyor belt, > > > anything > > you put or replace on it just moves automatically. > > > > Why is that? :) > > You do break existing behavior. > > Right now it possible to do: > > queue_setup(); queue_setup(); > > for the same queue. > > With you patch is not any more > Why not? > I think with my patch, > It assumes we can run below scenario on the same queue. > (note, I assume queue_stop/start has been moved from i40e to ethedev layer > already.) > queue_setup + queue_setup + dev_start + queue_setup + queue_setup,
Because you can't do queue_setup() on already started queue. So if you do start() inside setup() second setup() should fail. > queue_stop/start are handled inside queue_setup automatically after > dev_started? Again - I don't see any advantages to change existing API behavior and introduce implicit start/stop inside setup. It only introduce extra confusion for the users. So I still think we better keep existing behavior. Konstantin > . > > And I don't see an good reason to break existing behavior. > > What is the advantage of implicit call queue_start() implicitly from the > > queue_setup()/? > > Konstantin > > > > > > > > > Might be user doesn't want to start queue, might be he only wants to > > > > start it. > > > Use deferred_start_flag, > > > > Might be he would need to call queue_setup() once again later before > > > > starting it - based on some logic? > > > Dev_ops->queue_stop will be called first before dev_ops->queue_setup in > > rte_eth_rx|tx_queue_setup, if a queue is running. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the user wants to setup and start the queue immediately he can always > > do: > > > > > > > > rc = queue_setup(...); > > > > if (rc == 0) > > > > queue_start(...); > > > > > > application no need to call queue_start explicitly in this case. > > > > > > > > > > > We have a pretty well defined API here let's keep it like that. > > > > Konstantin
