From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/8] ring: dynamic rss configuration Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:11:09 +0200 Message-ID: <4742898.RcqEgbPpyt@xps13> References: <1434723200-7528-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> <2033219.3PlE3JM2PJ@xps13> <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A019FE98C@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "Kulasek, TomaszX" Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f45.google.com (mail-wg0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2731B3239 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:12:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wgmn9 with SMTP id n9so45568898wgm.0 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 08:12:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A019FE98C@IRSMSX102.ger.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" 2015-07-13 14:43, Kulasek, TomaszX: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > 2015-06-29 16:50, Tomasz Kulasek: > > > This implementation allows to set and read RSS configuration for ring > > > device, and is used to validate right values propagation over the > > > slaves, in test units for dynamic RSS configuration for bonding. > > > > > > It have no impact on packet processing by ring device. > > > > Adding some fake RSS to the ring PMD (in order to test bonding) is weird. > > The ring PMD is not a driver for testing. Maybe that the null PMD would be > > more appropriate. > > By the way the current RSS implementation is really bound to Intel > > devices. > > Before applying it to more drivers, we have to make sure it is generic > > enough. Maybe the RETA needs more abstraction. > > This is not RSS implementation, but implementation of Dynamic RSS > Configuration, already existing, and well defined in official documentation > for single port. > I don't know where you see bounding to Intel device. > It's an implementation of official API. What do you mean by "official"? My concern is that the RSS API in ethdev comes from a time where DPDK was Intel DPDK. I may be wrong but I think that other devices could need something more generic and better defined. > Anyway I will appreciate for any comment and opinion on that and > clarification what means more RETA abstraction in context of official API. > > I will check the possibility of moving it to the null pmd driver and will > prepare new version for easier reviewing. Meantime I'm waiting for more > opinions. Exact, we need more opinions on this topic.