From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] ethdev: add descriptor status API
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:54:32 +0100
Message-ID: <20170302155432.7e81e969@platinum>
References: <1479981261-19512-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1488388752-1819-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1488388752-1819-2-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <8966736f-3bcb-5096-5c2b-643c65751d5f@solarflare.com>
 <20170302145752.38b2f820@platinum>
 <d57af8bc-a4b5-427f-aa9f-dbc8a6bb60c7@solarflare.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
 <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
 <helin.zhang@intel.com>, <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
 <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>, <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>,
 <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBAB2C60
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  2 Mar 2017 15:54:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id v186so137344249wmd.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 06:54:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <d57af8bc-a4b5-427f-aa9f-dbc8a6bb60c7@solarflare.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>


> >>> + * Check the status of a Rx descriptor in the queue  
> >> I think it would be useful to highlight caller context.
> >> Should it be the same CPU which receives packets from the queue?  
> > Yes, you are right it would be useful. I suggest the following sentences:
> >
> >    This function should be called on a dataplane core like the
> >    Rx function. They should not be called concurrently on the same
> >    queue.  
> 
> The first sentence looks fine. "They" (functions?, dataplane cores?) is 
> unclear for me in the second. May be the first one is simply sufficient.

Ok, I'll keep the first one at least, and see if I can reword the
second one to make it clear.

> >>> + *
> >>> + * @param port_id
> >>> + *  The port identifier of the Ethernet device.
> >>> + * @param queue_id
> >>> + *  The Rx queue identifier on this port.
> >>> + * @param offset
> >>> + *  The offset of the descriptor starting from tail (0 is the next
> >>> + *  packet to be received by the driver).
> >>> + * @return
> >>> + *  - (RTE_ETH_DESC_AVAIL): Descriptor is available for the hardware to
> >>> + *    receive a packet.
> >>> + *  - (RTE_ETH_DESC_DONE): Descriptor is done, it is filled by hw, but
> >>> + *    not yet processed by the driver (i.e. in the receive queue).
> >>> + *  - (RTE_ETH_DESC_USED): Descriptor is unavailable (hold by driver,
> >>> + *    not yet returned to hw).  
> >> It looks like it is the most suitable for descriptors which are reserved
> >> and never used.  
> > Can you give some more details about what is a reserved but never
> > used descriptor? (same question for Tx)  
> 
> Our HW has a requirement to keep few descriptors always unused (i.e. 
> some gap between tail and head). It is just a few descriptors, but 
> invalid descriptor status may misguide application. E.g. if Rx queue 
> size is 512 and offset 510, it will always be unused (since it is 
> reserved). It is not an indication that core is too slow and can't keep 
> the pace.

Understood.

I can change _USED into _UNAVAIL (add it for Tx), with the following
description:

- (RTE_ETH_DESC_UNAVAIL): Descriptor is unavailable: either hold by driver
  and not yet returned to hw, or reserved by the hardware.