[v16] app/testpmd: support multi-process
Checks
Commit Message
This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
For example the following commands run two testpmd
processes:
* the primary process:
./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
--rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
* the secondary process:
./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
--rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
---
V16:
* revert unrelated changes.
* add some restrictions in doc.
v15:
* Fixed release notes.
* Cleanup documentation.
v14:
* Fixed comments by Andrew Rybchenko.
v13:
* Modified the doc syntax.
v12:
* Updated doc info.
v11:
* Fixed some minor syntax.
v10:
* Hid process type checks behind new functions.
* Added comments.
v9:
* Updated release notes and rst doc.
* Deleted deprecated codes.
* move macro and variable.
v8:
* Added warning info about queue numbers and process numbers.
v7:
* Fixed compiling error for unexpected unindent.
v6:
* Add rte flow description for multiple process.
v5:
* Fixed run_app.rst for multiple process description.
* Fix compiling error.
v4:
* Fixed minimum vlaue of Rxq or Txq in doc.
v3:
* Fixed compiling error using gcc10.0.
v2:
* Added document for this patch.
---
app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 6 ++
app/test-pmd/config.c | 20 ++++++-
app/test-pmd/parameters.c | 9 +++
app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
app/test-pmd/testpmd.h | 9 +++
doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst | 3 +
doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/run_app.rst | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
7 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
Comments
10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
> For example the following commands run two testpmd
> processes:
>
> * the primary process:
>
> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>
> * the secondary process:
>
> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> ---
> V16:
> * revert unrelated changes.
> * add some restrictions in doc.
I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>> processes:
>>
>> * the primary process:
>>
>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>
>> * the secondary process:
>>
>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> ---
>> V16:
>> * revert unrelated changes.
>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>
> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>
> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>
Hi, Thomas,
This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
please check it out, thanks.
>
> .
>
26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> > 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
> >> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
> >> For example the following commands run two testpmd
> >> processes:
> >>
> >> * the primary process:
> >>
> >> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
> >> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
> >>
> >> * the secondary process:
> >>
> >> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
> >> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> >> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
> >> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> V16:
> >> * revert unrelated changes.
> >> * add some restrictions in doc.
> >
> > I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
> >
> > BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
> >
> Hi, Thomas,
> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
> please check it out, thanks.
Andrew's comment from v15:
"
IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
consider is a start point to be applied.
"
在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>>>> processes:
>>>>
>>>> * the primary process:
>>>>
>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>>>
>>>> * the secondary process:
>>>>
>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> V16:
>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>>>
>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>>>
>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>>>
>> Hi, Thomas,
>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
>> please check it out, thanks.
>
> Andrew's comment from v15:
> "
> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
> consider is a start point to be applied.
> "
Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
meet the state sufficient to be applied?
>
>
> .
>
在 2021/7/26 15:28, Min Hu (Connor) 写道:
>
>
> 在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
>>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>>>>> processes:
>>>>>
>>>>> * the primary process:
>>>>>
>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>>>>
>>>>> * the secondary process:
>>>>>
>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> V16:
>>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
>>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>>>>
>>> Hi, Thomas,
>>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
>>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
>>> please check it out, thanks.
>>
>> Andrew's comment from v15:
>> "
>> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
>> consider is a start point to be applied.
>> "
> Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
> What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
> meet the state sufficient to be applied?
Hi, all,
How about this patch, could it be applied?
>
>>
>>
>> .
>>
> .
02/08/2021 03:51, Min Hu (Connor):
> 在 2021/7/26 15:28, Min Hu (Connor) 写道:
> > 在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> >> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
> >>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> >>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
> >>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
> >>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
> >>>>> processes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * the primary process:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
> >>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * the secondary process:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
> >>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> >>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
> >>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> V16:
> >>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
> >>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
> >>>>
> >>> Hi, Thomas,
> >>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
> >>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
> >>> please check it out, thanks.
> >>
> >> Andrew's comment from v15:
> >> "
> >> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
> >> consider is a start point to be applied.
> >> "
> > Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
> > What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
> > meet the state sufficient to be applied?
> Hi, all,
> How about this patch, could it be applied?
I was not confident enough to apply it in 21.08.
When others will be back, we'll discuss it again for 21.11.
On 8/2/2021 1:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 02/08/2021 03:51, Min Hu (Connor):
>> 在 2021/7/26 15:28, Min Hu (Connor) 写道:
>>> 在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>>>>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>>>>>>> processes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * the primary process:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * the secondary process:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> V16:
>>>>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
>>>>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>>>>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, Thomas,
>>>>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
>>>>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
>>>>> please check it out, thanks.
>>>> Andrew's comment from v15:
>>>> "
>>>> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
>>>> consider is a start point to be applied.
>>>> "
>>> Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
>>> What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
>>> meet the state sufficient to be applied?
>> Hi, all,
>> How about this patch, could it be applied?
> I was not confident enough to apply it in 21.08.
> When others will be back, we'll discuss it again for 21.11.
>
For 21.11 release.
Acked-by: Aman Deep Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>
On 8/16/2021 7:12 PM, Singh, Aman Deep wrote:
>
> On 8/2/2021 1:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 02/08/2021 03:51, Min Hu (Connor):
>>> 在 2021/7/26 15:28, Min Hu (Connor) 写道:
>>>> 在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>>>>>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>>>>>>>> processes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * the primary process:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * the secondary process:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> V16:
>>>>>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
>>>>>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>>>>>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi, Thomas,
>>>>>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
>>>>>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
>>>>>> please check it out, thanks.
>>>>> Andrew's comment from v15:
>>>>> "
>>>>> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
>>>>> consider is a start point to be applied.
>>>>> "
>>>> Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
>>>> What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
>>>> meet the state sufficient to be applied?
>>> Hi, all,
>>> How about this patch, could it be applied?
>> I was not confident enough to apply it in 21.08.
>> When others will be back, we'll discuss it again for 21.11.
>>
> For 21.11 release.
>
> Acked-by: Aman Deep Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>
>
Hi Connor,
Can you please rebase it to latest dpdk (v21.11-rc0) so we can proceed with it?
I am for getting the patch as early as possible in the release cycle, specially
before it is getting busy for -rc1.
Thanks,
ferruh
Thanks Ferruh, I will handle it as quickly as possible.
在 2021/8/24 20:18, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
> On 8/16/2021 7:12 PM, Singh, Aman Deep wrote:
>>
>> On 8/2/2021 1:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> 02/08/2021 03:51, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>> 在 2021/7/26 15:28, Min Hu (Connor) 写道:
>>>>> 在 2021/7/26 14:30, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>>> 26/07/2021 02:26, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>>>> 在 2021/7/24 19:45, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>>>>> 10/07/2021 05:50, Min Hu (Connor):
>>>>>>>>> This patch adds multi-process support for testpmd.
>>>>>>>>> For example the following commands run two testpmd
>>>>>>>>> processes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * the primary process:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i \
>>>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * the secondary process:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ./dpdk-testpmd --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i \
>>>>>>>>> --rxq=4 --txq=4 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> V16:
>>>>>>>>> * revert unrelated changes.
>>>>>>>>> * add some restrictions in doc.
>>>>>>>> I didn't see clear agreement to integrate this feature in DPDK 21.08.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW, the testpmd maintainer was not Cc'ed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, Thomas,
>>>>>>> This patch has two "acked" and one "reviewed-by".
>>>>>>> And Xiaoyun Li is the maintainer, I has already Cc'ed to him/her,
>>>>>>> please check it out, thanks.
>>>>>> Andrew's comment from v15:
>>>>>> "
>>>>>> IMHO, as I state above, current state is insufficient to
>>>>>> consider is a start point to be applied.
>>>>>> "
>>>>> Hi, Andrew, Thomos,
>>>>> What is the least thing should be done for this patch to
>>>>> meet the state sufficient to be applied?
>>>> Hi, all,
>>>> How about this patch, could it be applied?
>>> I was not confident enough to apply it in 21.08.
>>> When others will be back, we'll discuss it again for 21.11.
>>>
>> For 21.11 release.
>>
>> Acked-by: Aman Deep Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>
>>
>
> Hi Connor,
>
> Can you please rebase it to latest dpdk (v21.11-rc0) so we can proceed with it?
>
> I am for getting the patch as early as possible in the release cycle, specially
> before it is getting busy for -rc1.
>
> Thanks,
> ferruh
> .
>
@@ -5459,6 +5459,12 @@ cmd_set_flush_rx_parsed(void *parsed_result,
__rte_unused void *data)
{
struct cmd_set_flush_rx *res = parsed_result;
+
+ if (num_procs > 1 && (strcmp(res->mode, "on") == 0)) {
+ printf("multi-process doesn't support to flush Rx queues.\n");
+ return;
+ }
+
no_flush_rx = (uint8_t)((strcmp(res->mode, "on") == 0) ? 0 : 1);
}
@@ -2976,6 +2976,8 @@ rss_fwd_config_setup(void)
queueid_t rxq;
queueid_t nb_q;
streamid_t sm_id;
+ int start;
+ int end;
nb_q = nb_rxq;
if (nb_q > nb_txq)
@@ -2993,7 +2995,21 @@ rss_fwd_config_setup(void)
init_fwd_streams();
setup_fwd_config_of_each_lcore(&cur_fwd_config);
- rxp = 0; rxq = 0;
+
+ if (proc_id > 0 && nb_q % num_procs != 0)
+ printf("Warning! queue numbers should be multiple of processes, or packet loss will happen.\n");
+
+ /**
+ * In multi-process, All queues are allocated to different
+ * processes based on num_procs and proc_id. For example:
+ * if supports 4 queues(nb_q), 2 processes(num_procs),
+ * the 0~1 queue for primary process.
+ * the 2~3 queue for secondary process.
+ */
+ start = proc_id * nb_q / num_procs;
+ end = start + nb_q / num_procs;
+ rxp = 0;
+ rxq = start;
for (sm_id = 0; sm_id < cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams; sm_id++) {
struct fwd_stream *fs;
@@ -3010,6 +3026,8 @@ rss_fwd_config_setup(void)
continue;
rxp = 0;
rxq++;
+ if (rxq >= end)
+ rxq = start;
}
}
@@ -509,6 +509,9 @@ parse_link_speed(int n)
void
launch_args_parse(int argc, char** argv)
{
+#define PARAM_PROC_ID "proc-id"
+#define PARAM_NUM_PROCS "num-procs"
+
int n, opt;
char **argvopt;
int opt_idx;
@@ -628,6 +631,8 @@ launch_args_parse(int argc, char** argv)
{ "rx-mq-mode", 1, 0, 0 },
{ "record-core-cycles", 0, 0, 0 },
{ "record-burst-stats", 0, 0, 0 },
+ { PARAM_NUM_PROCS, 1, 0, 0 },
+ { PARAM_PROC_ID, 1, 0, 0 },
{ 0, 0, 0, 0 },
};
@@ -1394,6 +1399,10 @@ launch_args_parse(int argc, char** argv)
record_core_cycles = 1;
if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name, "record-burst-stats"))
record_burst_stats = 1;
+ if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name, PARAM_NUM_PROCS))
+ num_procs = atoi(optarg);
+ if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name, PARAM_PROC_ID))
+ proc_id = atoi(optarg);
break;
case 'h':
usage(argv[0]);
@@ -520,6 +520,62 @@ enum rte_eth_rx_mq_mode rx_mq_mode = ETH_MQ_RX_VMDQ_DCB_RSS;
*/
uint32_t eth_link_speed;
+/*
+ * ID of the current process in multi-process, used to
+ * configure the queues to be polled.
+ */
+int proc_id;
+
+/*
+ * Number of processes in multi-process, used to
+ * configure the queues to be polled.
+ */
+unsigned int num_procs = 1;
+
+static int
+eth_dev_configure_mp(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t nb_rx_q, uint16_t nb_tx_q,
+ const struct rte_eth_conf *dev_conf)
+{
+ if (is_proc_primary())
+ return rte_eth_dev_configure(port_id, nb_rx_q, nb_tx_q,
+ dev_conf);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int
+eth_dev_start_mp(uint16_t port_id)
+{
+ if (is_proc_primary())
+ return rte_eth_dev_start(port_id);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int
+eth_dev_stop_mp(uint16_t port_id)
+{
+ if (is_proc_primary())
+ return rte_eth_dev_stop(port_id);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void
+mempool_free_mp(struct rte_mempool *mp)
+{
+ if (is_proc_primary())
+ rte_mempool_free(mp);
+}
+
+static int
+eth_dev_set_mtu_mp(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t mtu)
+{
+ if (is_proc_primary())
+ return rte_eth_dev_set_mtu(port_id, mtu);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/* Forward function declarations */
static void setup_attached_port(portid_t pi);
static void check_all_ports_link_status(uint32_t port_mask);
@@ -982,6 +1038,14 @@ mbuf_pool_create(uint16_t mbuf_seg_size, unsigned nb_mbuf,
mb_size = sizeof(struct rte_mbuf) + mbuf_seg_size;
#endif
mbuf_poolname_build(socket_id, pool_name, sizeof(pool_name), size_idx);
+ if (!is_proc_primary()) {
+ rte_mp = rte_mempool_lookup(pool_name);
+ if (rte_mp == NULL)
+ rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE,
+ "Get mbuf pool for socket %u failed: %s\n",
+ socket_id, rte_strerror(rte_errno));
+ return rte_mp;
+ }
TESTPMD_LOG(INFO,
"create a new mbuf pool <%s>: n=%u, size=%u, socket=%u\n",
@@ -2008,6 +2072,11 @@ flush_fwd_rx_queues(void)
uint64_t prev_tsc = 0, diff_tsc, cur_tsc, timer_tsc = 0;
uint64_t timer_period;
+ if (num_procs > 1) {
+ printf("multi-process not support for flushing fwd Rx queues, skip the below lines and return.\n");
+ return;
+ }
+
/* convert to number of cycles */
timer_period = rte_get_timer_hz(); /* 1 second timeout */
@@ -2495,12 +2564,15 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
return -1;
}
/* configure port */
- diag = rte_eth_dev_configure(pi, nb_rxq + nb_hairpinq,
- nb_txq + nb_hairpinq,
- &(port->dev_conf));
+ diag = eth_dev_configure_mp(pi,
+ nb_rxq + nb_hairpinq,
+ nb_txq + nb_hairpinq,
+ &(port->dev_conf));
if (diag != 0) {
- if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(port->port_status),
- RTE_PORT_HANDLING, RTE_PORT_STOPPED) == 0)
+ if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(
+ &(port->port_status),
+ RTE_PORT_HANDLING,
+ RTE_PORT_STOPPED) == 0)
printf("Port %d can not be set back "
"to stopped\n", pi);
printf("Fail to configure port %d\n", pi);
@@ -2509,7 +2581,7 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
return -1;
}
}
- if (port->need_reconfig_queues > 0) {
+ if (port->need_reconfig_queues > 0 && is_proc_primary()) {
port->need_reconfig_queues = 0;
/* setup tx queues */
for (qi = 0; qi < nb_txq; qi++) {
@@ -2610,7 +2682,7 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
cnt_pi++;
/* start port */
- diag = rte_eth_dev_start(pi);
+ diag = eth_dev_start_mp(pi);
if (diag < 0) {
printf("Fail to start port %d: %s\n", pi,
rte_strerror(-diag));
@@ -2744,7 +2816,7 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
if (port->flow_list)
port_flow_flush(pi);
- if (rte_eth_dev_stop(pi) != 0)
+ if (eth_dev_stop_mp(pi) != 0)
RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "rte_eth_dev_stop failed for port %u\n",
pi);
@@ -2813,8 +2885,10 @@ close_port(portid_t pid)
continue;
}
- port_flow_flush(pi);
- rte_eth_dev_close(pi);
+ if (is_proc_primary()) {
+ port_flow_flush(pi);
+ rte_eth_dev_close(pi);
+ }
}
remove_invalid_ports();
@@ -3082,7 +3156,7 @@ pmd_test_exit(void)
}
for (i = 0 ; i < RTE_DIM(mempools) ; i++) {
if (mempools[i])
- rte_mempool_free(mempools[i]);
+ mempool_free_mp(mempools[i]);
}
printf("\nBye...\n");
@@ -3413,7 +3487,7 @@ update_jumbo_frame_offload(portid_t portid)
* if unset do it here
*/
if ((rx_offloads & DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME) == 0) {
- ret = rte_eth_dev_set_mtu(portid,
+ ret = eth_dev_set_mtu_mp(portid,
port->dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len - eth_overhead);
if (ret)
printf("Failed to set MTU to %u for port %u\n",
@@ -3603,6 +3677,10 @@ init_port_dcb_config(portid_t pid,
int retval;
uint16_t i;
+ if (num_procs > 1) {
+ printf("The multi-process feature doesn't support dcb.\n");
+ return -ENOTSUP;
+ }
rte_port = &ports[pid];
memset(&port_conf, 0, sizeof(struct rte_eth_conf));
@@ -3771,10 +3849,6 @@ main(int argc, char** argv)
rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Cannot init EAL: %s\n",
rte_strerror(rte_errno));
- if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_SECONDARY)
- rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE,
- "Secondary process type not supported.\n");
-
ret = register_eth_event_callback();
if (ret != 0)
rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Cannot register for ethdev events");
@@ -632,6 +632,15 @@ extern enum rte_eth_rx_mq_mode rx_mq_mode;
extern struct rte_flow_action_conntrack conntrack_context;
+extern int proc_id;
+extern unsigned int num_procs;
+
+static inline bool
+is_proc_primary(void)
+{
+ return rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY;
+}
+
static inline unsigned int
lcore_num(void)
{
@@ -90,6 +90,9 @@ New Features
usecases. Configuration happens via standard rawdev enq/deq operations. See
the :doc:`../rawdevs/cnxk_bphy` rawdev guide for more details on this driver.
+* **Added support multi-process for testpmd.**
+ Added command-line options to specify total number of processes and
+ current process ID. Each process owns subset of Rx and Tx queues.
Removed Items
-------------
@@ -545,3 +545,87 @@ The command line options are:
bit 0 - two hairpin ports loop
The default value is 0. Hairpin will use single port mode and implicit Tx flow mode.
+
+
+Testpmd Multi-Process Command-line Options
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The following are the command-line options for testpmd multi-process support:
+
+* primary process:
+
+.. code-block:: console
+
+ sudo ./dpdk-testpmd -a xxx --proc-type=auto -l 0-1 -- -i --rxq=4 --txq=4 \
+ --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
+
+* secondary process:
+
+.. code-block:: console
+
+ sudo ./dpdk-testpmd -a xxx --proc-type=auto -l 2-3 -- -i --rxq=4 --txq=4 \
+ --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
+
+The command line options are:
+
+* ``--num-procs=N``
+
+ The number of processes which will be used.
+
+* ``--proc-id=ID``
+
+ The ID of the current process (ID < num-procs). ID should be different in
+ primary process and secondary process, which starts from '0'.
+
+Calculation rule for queue:
+All queues are allocated to different processes based on ``proc_num`` and
+``proc_id``.
+Calculation rule for the testpmd to allocate queues to each process:
+* start(queue start id) = proc_id * nb_q / num_procs；
+
+* end(queue end id) = start + nb_q / num_procs；
+
+For example, if testpmd is configured to have 4 Tx and Rx queues,
+queues 0 and 1 will be used by the primary process and
+queues 2 and 3 will be used by the secondary process.
+
+The number of queues should be a multiple of the number of processes. If not,
+redundant queues will exist after queues are allocated to processes. If RSS
+is enabled, packet loss occurs when traffic is sent to all processes at the same
+time. Some traffic goes to redundant queues and cannot be forwarded.
+
+All the dev ops is supported in primary process. While secondary process is
+not permitted to allocate or release shared memory, so some ops are not supported
+as follows:
+
+- ``dev_configure``
+- ``dev_start``
+- ``dev_stop``
+- ``rx_queue_setup``
+- ``tx_queue_setup``
+- ``rx_queue_release``
+- ``tx_queue_release``
+
+So, any command from testpmd which calls those APIs will not be supported in
+secondary process, like:
+
+.. code-block:: console
+
+ port config all rxq|txq|rxd|txd <value>
+ port config <port_id> rx_offload xxx on/off
+ port config <port_id> tx_offload xxx on/off
+
+etc.
+
+When secondary is running, port in primary is not permitted to be stopped.
+Reconfigure operation is only valid in primary.
+
+Stats is supported, stats will not change when one quits and starts, as they
+share the same buffer to store the stats. Flow rules are maintained in process
+level: primary and secondary has its own flow list (but one flow list in HW).
+The two can see all the queues, so setting the flow rules for the other is OK.
+But in the testpmd primary process receiving or transmitting packets from the
+queue allocated for secondary process is not permitted, and same for secondary
+process.
+
+Flow API and RSS are supported.