From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] testpmd: configurable tx_first burst number Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 08:31:55 +0200 Message-ID: <1640688.ZKKLjeEMeZ@xps13> References: <1462488421-118990-1-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com> <1511439.3kRGpiG3WX@xps13> <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE094110743728@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" To: "Wang, Zhihong" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE3B2C19 for ; Thu, 26 May 2016 08:31:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id n129so86409750wmn.1 for ; Wed, 25 May 2016 23:31:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE094110743728@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-05-26 02:53, Wang, Zhihong: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > 2016-05-05 18:46, Zhihong Wang: > > > This patch enables configurable tx_first burst number. > > > > > > Use "start tx_first (burst_num)" to specify how many bursts of packets to > > > be sent before forwarding start, or "start tx_first" like before for the > > > default 1 burst send. > > > > The idea here is to fill the loopback latency gap with bursts. > > Would it be possible to make it automatic by detecting the first > > received packets to stop Tx generator? > > The idea is great! The implementation might not be graceful though > -- current tx_first mode first calls txonly engine before calling the > actual engine, say iofwd, so iofwd is not established before tx_first > is done, therefore no detection. And what about rewriting tx_first? No strong opinion. I let you and Pablo decide. > It's possible to do this, but we need to implement another forward > engine like "io_retry_fill_first" alone, it complicates testpmd just for > this loop back test. > > Looks to me it's better to use combination of existing fwd engines to > do this, it's also more flexible with burst number parameters.