mbox series

[v4,0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support

Message ID 1603713305-30991-1-git-send-email-viacheslavo@nvidia.com (mailing list archive)
Headers
Series net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support |

Message

Slava Ovsiienko Oct. 26, 2020, 11:54 a.m. UTC 
  This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving
buffer split feasture [1]

[1] http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/81154/

Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>

---
v1: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/81808/

v2: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/81923/
    - typos
    - documentation is updated

v3: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/82177/
    - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
    - minor optimizations in PMD

v4: - rebasing

Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
  net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
  net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
  net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
  net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
  net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
  doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide

 doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
 8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

Comments

Raslan Darawsheh Oct. 26, 2020, 3:25 p.m. UTC | #1 
Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Raslan
> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> 
> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving
> buffer split feasture [1]
> 
> [1]
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> 
> ---
> v1:
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
> 
> v2:
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
>     - typos
>     - documentation is updated
> 
> v3:
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
>     - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
>     - minor optimizations in PMD
> 
> v4: - rebasing
> 
> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
>   net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
>   net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
>   net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
>   net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
>   net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
>   doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
> 
>  doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
>  8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 1.8.3.1

Series applied to next-net-mlx,

Kindest regards,
Raslan Darawsheh
Ferruh Yigit Oct. 26, 2020, 5:04 p.m. UTC | #2 
On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Raslan
>> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
>>
>> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving
>> buffer split feasture [1]
>>
>> [1]
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
>> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>>
>> ---
>> v1:
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
>> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>> v2:
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
>> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>      - typos
>>      - documentation is updated
>>
>> v3:
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatch
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db3
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
>> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>      - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
>>      - minor optimizations in PMD
>>
>> v4: - rebasing
>>
>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
>>    net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
>>    net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
>>    net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
>>    net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
>>    net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
>>    doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
>>
>>   doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
>>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
>>   8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
> 
> Series applied to next-net-mlx,
> 

The feature was references with different name in each commit, I tried to unify 
it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?
Slava Ovsiienko Oct. 26, 2020, 5:38 p.m. UTC | #3 
Hi,  Ferruh

PSB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 19:04
> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
> <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> <orika@nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> 
> On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
> >> To: dev@dpdk.org
> >> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> >> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Raslan
> >> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
> >> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> >>
> >> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving buffer
> >> split feasture [1]
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
> >> h
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> 3
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
> >> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> v1:
> >> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
> >> h
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> 3
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
> >> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>
> >> v2:
> >> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
> >> h
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> 3
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
> >> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>      - typos
> >>      - documentation is updated
> >>
> >> v3:
> >> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
> >> h
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> 3
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
> >> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>      - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
> >>      - minor optimizations in PMD
> >>
> >> v4: - rebasing
> >>
> >> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
> >>    net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
> >>    net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
> >>    net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
> >>    net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
> >>    net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
> >>    doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
> >>
> >>   doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
> >>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
> >>   8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> 1.8.3.1
> >
> > Series applied to next-net-mlx,
> >
> 
> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I tried to unify
> it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?

>>	doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide
>>	net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities
OK about above.

>>	net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split
It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath 

>>	net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
OK

>>	net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split
It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split"

>>	net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description
IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description"
or 
"net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"

Could you, please, also squash the hotfix:
http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/82218/

Thanks in advance,
Slava
Ferruh Yigit Oct. 27, 2020, 11:05 a.m. UTC | #4 
On 10/26/2020 5:38 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
> Hi,  Ferruh
> 
> PSB
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 19:04
>> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
>> <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
>> <orika@nvidia.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
>>
>> On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
>>>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Raslan
>>>> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving buffer
>>>> split feasture [1]
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
>>>> h
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>> 3
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
>>>> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> v1:
>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
>>>> h
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>> 3
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
>>>> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> v2:
>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
>>>> h
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>> 3
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
>>>> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>       - typos
>>>>       - documentation is updated
>>>>
>>>> v3:
>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc
>>>> h
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>> 3
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
>>>> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>       - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
>>>>       - minor optimizations in PMD
>>>>
>>>> v4: - rebasing
>>>>
>>>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
>>>>     net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
>>>>     net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
>>>>     net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
>>>>     net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
>>>>     net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
>>>>     doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
>>>>
>>>>    doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
>>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
>>>>    8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>
>>> Series applied to next-net-mlx,
>>>
>>
>> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I tried to unify
>> it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
>> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?
> 
>>> 	doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide
>>> 	net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities
> OK about above.
> 
>>> 	net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split
> It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath
> 

Isn't the supporting the "Rx buffer split" mean supporting it on the datapath, 
where else it can be supported, the "on datapath" looks redundant to me.

>>> 	net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
> OK
> 
>>> 	net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split
> It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split"
> 

Like above, isn't the configure "Rx buffer split" mean configuring Rx queue for 
it, "Rx queue" looks redundant to me.

For both above, if you have strong opinion to update them, I can. But I prefer 
shorter versions.

>>> 	net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description
> IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description"
> or
> "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
> 

OK to use "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"

> Could you, please, also squash the hotfix:
> http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/82218/
>

OK
Slava Ovsiienko Oct. 27, 2020, 7:05 p.m. UTC | #5 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 13:05
> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
> <rasland@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> <orika@nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> 
> On 10/26/2020 5:38 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
> > Hi,  Ferruh
> >
> > PSB
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 19:04
> >> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
> >> <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> >> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> >> <orika@nvidia.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split
> >> support
> >>
> >> On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> >>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
> >>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
> >>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan
> Azrad
> >>>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>;
> Raslan
> >>>> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
> >>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving buffer
> >>>> split feasture [1]
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]
> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
> >>>> tc
> >>>> h
> >>
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>>>
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> >> 3
> >>>>
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
> >>>> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> v1:
> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
> >>>> tc
> >>>> h
> >>
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>>>
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> >> 3
> >>>>
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
> >>>> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> v2:
> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
> >>>> tc
> >>>> h
> >>
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>>>
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> >> 3
> >>>>
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
> >>>> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>>       - typos
> >>>>       - documentation is updated
> >>>>
> >>>> v3:
> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
> >>>> tc
> >>>> h
> >>
> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
> >>>>
> >>
> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
> >> 3
> >>>>
> >>
> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
> >>>> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>>       - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
> >>>>       - minor optimizations in PMD
> >>>>
> >>>> v4: - rebasing
> >>>>
> >>>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
> >>>>     net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
> >>>>     net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
> >>>>     net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
> >>>>     net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
> >>>>     net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
> >>>>     doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
> >>>>
> >>>>    doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
> >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
> >>>>    drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
> >>>>    8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 1.8.3.1
> >>>
> >>> Series applied to next-net-mlx,
> >>>
> >>
> >> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I
> >> tried to unify it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
> >> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?
> >
> >>> 	doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide
> >>> 	net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities
> > OK about above.
> >
> >>> 	net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split
> > It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath
> >
> 
> Isn't the supporting the "Rx buffer split" mean supporting it on the datapath,
> where else it can be supported, the "on datapath" looks redundant to me.

Options for possible "support Buffer Split" meaning:
- generic PMD configuration
- queue configuration
- reporting caps
- datapath

The series is split for commits those updating the very specific parts in PMD.
We may drop this specifics but we would lose the series split meaning.
Sure, the entire series is about "support Rx buffer split", but each commit has
its own clarification in the headline.

> 
> >>> 	net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
> > OK
> >
> >>> 	net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split
> > It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split"
> >
> 
> Like above, isn't the configure "Rx buffer split" mean configuring Rx queue for
> it, "Rx queue" looks redundant to me.
It just emphasizes - "the queue object is configured in this specific commit",
it would be easier to find this point and understand what it is in the long git log.
Hence, in my opinion, "queue" is some kind of extra clue, we should not drop it.

> For both above, if you have strong opinion to update them, I can. But I prefer
> shorter versions.
> 

> >>> 	net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description
> > IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description"
> > or
> > "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
> >
> 
> OK to use "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
> 
Please, see dpdk-next-net-mlx - Raslan updated the subtree, addressing
the hotfix and yours and mine comments.

With best regards,  Slava
Ferruh Yigit Oct. 29, 2020, 1:09 p.m. UTC | #6 
On 10/27/2020 7:05 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 13:05
>> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
>> <rasland@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
>> <orika@nvidia.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
>>
>> On 10/26/2020 5:38 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
>>> Hi,  Ferruh
>>>
>>> PSB
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 19:04
>>>> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
>>>> <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
>>>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
>>>> <orika@nvidia.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split
>>>> support
>>>>
>>>> On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM
>>>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>>>>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan
>> Azrad
>>>>>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>;
>> Raslan
>>>>>> Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving buffer
>>>>>> split feasture [1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
>>>>>> tc
>>>>>> h
>>>>
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>>>> 3
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u
>>>>>> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v1:
>>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
>>>>>> tc
>>>>>> h
>>>>
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>>>> 3
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi
>>>>>> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> v2:
>>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
>>>>>> tc
>>>>>> h
>>>>
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>>>> 3
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6
>>>>>> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>>>        - typos
>>>>>>        - documentation is updated
>>>>>>
>>>>>> v3:
>>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa
>>>>>> tc
>>>>>> h
>>>>
>> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db
>>>> 3
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&amp;sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu
>>>>>> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>>>        - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed
>>>>>>        - minor optimizations in PMD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> v4: - rebasing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6):
>>>>>>      net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine
>>>>>>      net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split
>>>>>>      net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
>>>>>>      net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split
>>>>>>      net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities
>>>>>>      doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst        |   6 +-
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h         |   3 +
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c  |   4 ++
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c      |   3 +
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c     | 136
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c    |   3 +-
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h    |  13 +++-
>>>>>>     drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c |  20 +++---
>>>>>>     8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>>>
>>>>> Series applied to next-net-mlx,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I
>>>> tried to unify it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
>>>> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?
>>>
>>>>> 	doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide
>>>>> 	net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities
>>> OK about above.
>>>
>>>>> 	net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split
>>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath
>>>
>>
>> Isn't the supporting the "Rx buffer split" mean supporting it on the datapath,
>> where else it can be supported, the "on datapath" looks redundant to me.
> 
> Options for possible "support Buffer Split" meaning:
> - generic PMD configuration
> - queue configuration
> - reporting caps
> - datapath
> 
> The series is split for commits those updating the very specific parts in PMD.
> We may drop this specifics but we would lose the series split meaning.
> Sure, the entire series is about "support Rx buffer split", but each commit has
> its own clarification in the headline.
> 
>>
>>>>> 	net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
>>> OK
>>>
>>>>> 	net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split
>>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split"
>>>
>>
>> Like above, isn't the configure "Rx buffer split" mean configuring Rx queue for
>> it, "Rx queue" looks redundant to me.
> It just emphasizes - "the queue object is configured in this specific commit",
> it would be easier to find this point and understand what it is in the long git log.
> Hence, in my opinion, "queue" is some kind of extra clue, we should not drop it.
> 
>> For both above, if you have strong opinion to update them, I can. But I prefer
>> shorter versions.
>>
> 
>>>>> 	net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description
>>> IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description"
>>> or
>>> "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
>>>
>>
>> OK to use "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
>>
> Please, see dpdk-next-net-mlx - Raslan updated the subtree, addressing
> the hotfix and yours and mine comments.
> 

What to see in the sub-tree?
Making changes is easy, the essence is discussion and reaching into a consensus, 
which is what I am trying to do, without a consensus what is the point of 
updating it in the mlx sub-tree?
Slava Ovsiienko Oct. 29, 2020, 2:21 p.m. UTC | #7 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 15:10
> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
> <rasland@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> <orika@nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support
> 
> On 10/27/2020 7:05 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 13:05
> >> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
> >> <rasland@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Matan Azrad
> >> <matan@nvidia.com>; Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> >> <orika@nvidia.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split
> >> support
> >>
[..snip..]
> >>>>
> >>>> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I
> >>>> tried to unify it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net.
> >>>> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles?
> >>>
> >>>>> 	doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide
> >>>>> 	net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities
> >>> OK about above.
> >>>
> >>>>> 	net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split
> >>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath
> >>>
> >>
> >> Isn't the supporting the "Rx buffer split" mean supporting it on the
> >> datapath, where else it can be supported, the "on datapath" looks
> redundant to me.
> >
> > Options for possible "support Buffer Split" meaning:
> > - generic PMD configuration
> > - queue configuration
> > - reporting caps
> > - datapath
> >
> > The series is split for commits those updating the very specific parts in PMD.
> > We may drop this specifics but we would lose the series split meaning.
> > Sure, the entire series is about "support Rx buffer split", but each
> > commit has its own clarification in the headline.
> >
> >>
> >>>>> 	net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue
> >>> OK
> >>>
> >>>>> 	net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split
> >>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split"
> >>>
> >>
> >> Like above, isn't the configure "Rx buffer split" mean configuring Rx
> >> queue for it, "Rx queue" looks redundant to me.
> > It just emphasizes - "the queue object is configured in this specific
> > commit", it would be easier to find this point and understand what it is in the
> long git log.
> > Hence, in my opinion, "queue" is some kind of extra clue, we should not drop
> it.
> >
> >> For both above, if you have strong opinion to update them, I can. But
> >> I prefer shorter versions.
> >>
> >
> >>>>> 	net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description
> >>> IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description"
> >>> or
> >>> "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
> >>>
> >>
> >> OK to use "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description"
> >>
> > Please, see dpdk-next-net-mlx - Raslan updated the subtree, addressing
> > the hotfix and yours and mine comments.
> >
> 
> What to see in the sub-tree?
> Making changes is easy, the essence is discussion and reaching into a
> consensus, which is what I am trying to do, without a consensus what is the
> point of updating it in the mlx sub-tree?

Mmm, I hoped we got consensus, I agreed with you - the feature should be
named in the same fashion in the commits and, in the same time, we would like
to emphasize some commit specifics. I just tried to save your efforts with taking prepared
commits from sub-tree. The patches are exactly the same, only headlines are updated.
What, in your opinion, should be the next step? Do you mean we should send
an updated version with updated headlines to the mailing list?

With best regards, Slava