[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eventdev: Add rte_errno return values to the enqueue and dequeue functions
Eads, Gage
gage.eads at intel.com
Mon Feb 13 17:05:35 CET 2017
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 6:08 AM
> To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>
> Cc: Eads, Gage <gage.eads at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org;
> hemant.agrawal at nxp.com; Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>;
> nipun.gupta at nxp.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] eventdev: Add rte_errno return values to the enqueue and
> dequeue functions
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 05:18:11PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:38:55AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 03:02:21PM -0600, Gage Eads wrote:
> > > > This change allows user software to differentiate between an
> > > > invalid argument (such as an invalid queue_id or sched_type in an
> > > > enqueued event) and backpressure from the event device.
> > > >
> > > > The port and device ID checks are placed in
> > > > RTE_LIBRTE_EVENTDEV_DEBUG header guards to avoid the performance
> hit in non-debug execution.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads at intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > >
> > > Do we have some idea of the performance hit from these? It may be
> > > too soon to know, given we don't have many drivers to test with, but
> > > if there is no perf hit seen with the SW driver, I think we should
> > > look to just always do this, rather than having it compile-time off.
> > > If it does
> >
> > IMO, It is better put to under compile-time like ethdev. It is
> > difficult predict the performance regression on wide range of cores
> > that DPDK runs now. I think we need to add following additional checks
> > based on Gage header file change
> >
> > 1) Per event queue ID is valid or not?
> > 2) Per event's sched type doesn't match the capabilities of the destination
> queue.
> >
>
> Ok, if we are expanding the number of checks then I definitely think it needs to
> be compile-time selected.
My thinking is that, unlike checking the dev ID or port ID, per-event checks should be in the PMD itself since (presumably) it will loop over the events anyway. I also think it makes sense for the per-event error checking not to be compile-time selectable because a PMD needs to handle the invalid queue ID or sched_type case anyway.
>
> /Bruce
> >
> > > prove to be a performance problem we can look to #ifdef it out later.
> > >
> > > /Bruce
More information about the dev
mailing list