From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ivan Khoronzhuk Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: add XDP support Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 21:30:44 +0300 Message-ID: <20190418183043.GD27879@khorivan> References: <20190417174942.11811-1-ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org> <20190417174942.11811-4-ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org> <20190418094008.GB27879@khorivan> <20190418104111.559a0e74@cakuba.netronome.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190418104111.559a0e74@cakuba.netronome.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: grygorii.strashko@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Linux Netdev List , ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org, hawk@kernel.org, xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , aniel@iogearbox.net, John Fastabend List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:41:11AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:40:10 +0300, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: >> >work? The stack's TX ring has a lock, and can be used from any CPU, >> >while XDP TX rings are per-PCU, no? >> Yes and no. >> am572 has more queues then CPU num, How I can choose tx queue not based on CPU >> num? It's always shared and has to have lock, and cpdma is done in this way. > >Oh, I see, you already have another lock. > >> Here another thing bothering me, I send it to queue 0 always, instead of >> taking cpu num. Not sure about this, but I expect to have some tx queue >> not bind to cpu and didn't find a way it can be changed dynamically in >> redirect. > >Not sure I understand :) I mean, is there a capability to choose tx queue while XDP_REDIRECT or XDP_TX. >>From what I've seen it's taken by: qidx = smp_processor_id(); What if I need to send classified traffic to hw queue 4 for instance... -- Regards, Ivan Khoronzhuk