From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Pawel Kaminski <pawel.kaminski@intel.com>
Cc: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org,
Michal Wilczynski <michal.wilczynski@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v1] ice: Add support for devlink loopback param.
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 18:37:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231201183704.382f5964@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231201235949.62728-1-pawel.kaminski@intel.com>
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 15:59:49 -0800 Pawel Kaminski wrote:
> Add support for devlink loopback param. Supported values are "enabled",
> "disabled" and "prioritized". Default configuration is set to "enabled.
>
> By default loopback traffic BW is locked to PF configured BW.
First off - hairpin-bandwidth or some such would be a much better name.
Second - you must explain every devlink param in Documentation/
Also admission ctrl vs prioritizing sounds like different knobs.
> HW is
> capable of higher speeds on loopback traffic. Loopback param set to
> "prioritized" enables HW BW prioritization for VF to VF traffic,
> effectively increasing BW between VFs. Applicable to 8x10G and 4x25G
> cards.
Not very clear what this means...
So the VFs are Tx bandwidth limited to link speed.
How does the device know it can admit extra traffic?
Presumably this doesn't affect rates set by devlink rate?
> To achieve max loopback BW one could:
> - Make, as much as possible, fair distribution of loopback usages
> between groups to gain maximal loopback BW.
Can't parse what this means.
> - Try to dedicate ports for loopback only traffic, with minimal network
> traffic.
Or this.
> Changing loopback configuration will trigger CORER reset in order to take
> effect.
Changing config of a permanent param shouldn't trigger anything.
Please see the documentation for expected behavior..
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Pawel Kaminski <pawel.kaminski@intel.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Wilczynski <michal.wilczynski@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v1] ice: Add support for devlink loopback param.
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 18:37:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231201183704.382f5964@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231201235949.62728-1-pawel.kaminski@intel.com>
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 15:59:49 -0800 Pawel Kaminski wrote:
> Add support for devlink loopback param. Supported values are "enabled",
> "disabled" and "prioritized". Default configuration is set to "enabled.
>
> By default loopback traffic BW is locked to PF configured BW.
First off - hairpin-bandwidth or some such would be a much better name.
Second - you must explain every devlink param in Documentation/
Also admission ctrl vs prioritizing sounds like different knobs.
> HW is
> capable of higher speeds on loopback traffic. Loopback param set to
> "prioritized" enables HW BW prioritization for VF to VF traffic,
> effectively increasing BW between VFs. Applicable to 8x10G and 4x25G
> cards.
Not very clear what this means...
So the VFs are Tx bandwidth limited to link speed.
How does the device know it can admit extra traffic?
Presumably this doesn't affect rates set by devlink rate?
> To achieve max loopback BW one could:
> - Make, as much as possible, fair distribution of loopback usages
> between groups to gain maximal loopback BW.
Can't parse what this means.
> - Try to dedicate ports for loopback only traffic, with minimal network
> traffic.
Or this.
> Changing loopback configuration will trigger CORER reset in order to take
> effect.
Changing config of a permanent param shouldn't trigger anything.
Please see the documentation for expected behavior..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-02 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-01 23:59 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v1] ice: Add support for devlink loopback param Pawel Kaminski
2023-12-01 23:59 ` Pawel Kaminski
2023-12-02 2:37 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-12-02 2:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-12-07 0:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kaminski, Pawel
2023-12-07 0:26 ` Kaminski, Pawel
2024-02-26 9:40 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2024-02-26 9:40 ` Romanowski, Rafal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231201183704.382f5964@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
--cc=michal.wilczynski@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pawel.kaminski@intel.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.