diff mbox

[dpdk-dev,4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup

Message ID 1462488421-118990-5-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded, archived
Delegated to: Thomas Monjalon
Headers

Commit Message

Zhihong Wang May 5, 2016, 10:46 p.m. UTC 
  This patch removes constraints in rxq handling when multiqueue is enabled
to handle all the rxqs.

Current testpmd forces a dedicated core for each rxq, some rxqs may be
ignored when core number is less than rxq number, and that causes confusion
and inconvenience.


Signed-off-by: Zhihong Wang <zhihong.wang@intel.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/config.c | 8 +-------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon May 25, 2016, 9:42 a.m. UTC | #1 
2016-05-05 18:46, Zhihong Wang:
> This patch removes constraints in rxq handling when multiqueue is enabled
> to handle all the rxqs.
> 
> Current testpmd forces a dedicated core for each rxq, some rxqs may be
> ignored when core number is less than rxq number, and that causes confusion
> and inconvenience.

I have the feeling that "constraints", "confusion" and "inconvenience"
should be more explained.
Please give some examples with not enough and too much cores. Thanks
Zhihong Wang May 26, 2016, 2:55 a.m. UTC | #2 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 5:42 PM
> To: Wang, Zhihong <zhihong.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup
> 
> 2016-05-05 18:46, Zhihong Wang:
> > This patch removes constraints in rxq handling when multiqueue is enabled
> > to handle all the rxqs.
> >
> > Current testpmd forces a dedicated core for each rxq, some rxqs may be
> > ignored when core number is less than rxq number, and that causes confusion
> > and inconvenience.
> 
> I have the feeling that "constraints", "confusion" and "inconvenience"
> should be more explained.
> Please give some examples with not enough and too much cores. Thanks

Sure, will add detailed description in v2  ;)
Zhihong Wang June 3, 2016, 9:22 a.m. UTC | #3 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wang, Zhihong
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 10:55 AM
> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 5:42 PM
> > To: Wang, Zhihong <zhihong.wang@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> > <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup
> >
> > 2016-05-05 18:46, Zhihong Wang:
> > > This patch removes constraints in rxq handling when multiqueue is enabled
> > > to handle all the rxqs.
> > >
> > > Current testpmd forces a dedicated core for each rxq, some rxqs may be
> > > ignored when core number is less than rxq number, and that causes
> confusion
> > > and inconvenience.
> >
> > I have the feeling that "constraints", "confusion" and "inconvenience"
> > should be more explained.
> > Please give some examples with not enough and too much cores. Thanks
> 
> Sure, will add detailed description in v2  ;)

V2 has been sent.
We see increasing examples looking for help on this "confusion",
one recent example:
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-June/072110.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c
index bb0b542..8ab2963 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
@@ -1193,19 +1193,13 @@  rss_fwd_config_setup(void)
 	cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_ports = nb_fwd_ports;
 	cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams =
 		(streamid_t) (nb_q * cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_ports);
-	if (cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams > cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_lcores)
-		cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams =
-			(streamid_t)cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_lcores;
-	else
-		cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_lcores =
-			(lcoreid_t)cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams;
 
 	/* reinitialize forwarding streams */
 	init_fwd_streams();
 
 	setup_fwd_config_of_each_lcore(&cur_fwd_config);
 	rxp = 0; rxq = 0;
-	for (lc_id = 0; lc_id < cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_lcores; lc_id++) {
+	for (lc_id = 0; lc_id < cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams; lc_id++) {
 		struct fwd_stream *fs;
 
 		fs = fwd_streams[lc_id];