Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread lihuisong (C)
在 2023/11/3 0:51, Morten Brørup 写道: From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 17.24 On 11/2/2023 1:59 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: 在 2023/11/2 0:08, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: Do we need to report this

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 11/2/2023 1:59 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: > > 在 2023/11/2 0:08, Stephen Hemminger 写道: >> On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 >> "lihuisong (C)" wrote: >> Do we need to report this size? It's a common feature for all PMDs. It would make sense then to have max_rx_bufsize set to 16K by defa

RE: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] > Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 18.06 > > On 11/2/2023 4:51 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: > >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 17.24 > >> > >> On 11/2/2023 1:59 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: > >>> > >>

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 11/2/2023 5:12 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] >> Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 18.06 >> >> On 11/2/2023 4:51 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 17.24 On 11/2

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 11/2/2023 4:51 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] >> Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 17.24 >> >> On 11/2/2023 1:59 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: >>> >>> 在 2023/11/2 0:08, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote

RE: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-02 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@amd.com] > Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2023 17.24 > > On 11/2/2023 1:59 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: > > > > 在 2023/11/2 0:08, Stephen Hemminger 写道: > >> On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 > >> "lihuisong (C)" wrote: > >> > Do we need to report this size?

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-01 Thread lihuisong (C)
在 2023/11/2 0:08, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: Do we need to report this size? It's a common feature for all PMDs. It would make sense then to have max_rx_bufsize set to 16K by default in ethdev, and PMD could then raise/lower based on hardwa

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-11-01 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:36:07 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: > > Do we need to report this size? It's a common feature for all PMDs. > > It would make sense then to have max_rx_bufsize set to 16K by default > > in ethdev, and PMD could then raise/lower based on hardware. > It is not appropriate t

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-31 Thread lihuisong (C)
Hi Stephen, 在 2023/10/31 23:40, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 10:57:45 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: User do decide their implement based on their cases in project. May it be a point for this that user don't want to do memcpy for multi segment packets and just use the first mbuf me

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-31 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 10:57:45 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: > >> User do decide their implement based on their cases in project. > >> May it be a point for this that user don't want to do memcpy for > >> multi segment packets and just use the first mbuf memory. > >> > >> Now that there is the "min_

RE: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-31 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: lihuisong (C) [mailto:lihuis...@huawei.com] > Sent: Tuesday, 31 October 2023 03.58 > > 在 2023/10/31 2:48, Stephen Hemminger 写道: > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:25:34 +0800 > > "lihuisong (C)" wrote: > > > >>> > The "min_rx_bufsize" in struct rte_eth_dev_info stands for the > minimum

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-30 Thread lihuisong (C)
在 2023/10/31 2:48, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:25:34 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: The "min_rx_bufsize" in struct rte_eth_dev_info stands for the minimum Rx buffer size supported by hardware. Actually, some engines also have the maximum Rx buffer specification, like, hns3.

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-30 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:25:34 +0800 "lihuisong (C)" wrote: > > > >> The "min_rx_bufsize" in struct rte_eth_dev_info stands for the > >> minimum Rx buffer size supported by hardware. Actually, some > >> engines also have the maximum Rx buffer specification, like, hns3. > >> > >> If mbuf data room

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce maximum Rx buffer size

2023-10-29 Thread lihuisong (C)
在 2023/10/29 23:48, Stephen Hemminger 写道: On Sat, 28 Oct 2023 09:48:44 +0800 Huisong Li wrote: The "min_rx_bufsize" in struct rte_eth_dev_info stands for the minimum Rx buffer size supported by hardware. Actually, some engines also have the maximum Rx buffer specification, like, hns3. If mb