; > Richardson ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > ; Gaëtan Rivet ;
> > Wu, Jingjing
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 09:57:43PM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > > -Original Message
> To: Matan Azrad
> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; dev@dpdk.org; Bruce
> > > Richardson ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > ; Gaëtan Rivet
> > > ; Wu, Jingjing
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> > >
> > > On T
gt; Richardson ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > ; Gaëtan Rivet ;
> > Wu, Jingjing
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 07:37:06PM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
>
> > > &
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 10:14 PM
> To: Matan Azrad
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; dev@dpdk.org; Bruce
> Richardson ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> ; Gaëtan Rivet ;
> Wu, Jingjing
> Subject
chardson ; Matan
> > Azrad ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > ; Gaëtan Rivet ;
> > Wu, Jingjing
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 06:06:48PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 08/12/2017 13:31, Nei
Hi
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 7:43 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Bruce Richardson ; Matan
> Azrad ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> ; Gaëtan Rivet ;
> Wu, Jingjing
> Subject
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 06:06:48PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 08/12/2017 13:31, Neil Horman:
> > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:35:18PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 05/12/2017 11:05, Bruce Richardson:
> > > > > I think you suggest to make all the ethdev configuration race safe, it
> > > > >
08/12/2017 13:31, Neil Horman:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:35:18PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 05/12/2017 11:05, Bruce Richardson:
> > > > I think you suggest to make all the ethdev configuration race safe, it
> > > > is behind to this thread. Current ethdev implementation leave the
> > > >
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:35:18PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 05/12/2017 11:05, Bruce Richardson:
> > > I think you suggest to make all the ethdev configuration race safe, it
> > > is behind to this thread. Current ethdev implementation leave the
> > > race management to applications, so port
05/12/2017 11:05, Bruce Richardson:
> > I think you suggest to make all the ethdev configuration race safe, it
> > is behind to this thread. Current ethdev implementation leave the
> > race management to applications, so port ownership as any other port
> > configurations should be designed in the
05/12/2017 20:26, Neil Horman:
> I get that much of dpdk relies on the fact that the application either handles
> all the locking, or architects itself so that a single thread of execution (or
> at least only one thread at a time), is responsible for packet processing and
> port configuration.
Yes
06/12/2017 01:40, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net]
> > 05/12/2017 16:13, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > > > Keep in mind that the owner can be an application thread.
> > > > If you prefer using a single function pointer (may help for
> > > > atomic implementation
>
>
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2017 3:50 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: Matan Azrad ; Neil Horman ;
> Gaëtan Rivet ; Wu,
> Jingjing ; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port o
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 06:08:35AM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
>
> Please look at the code again, secondary process cannot take ownership, I
> don't allow it!
> Actually, I think it must not be like that as no limitation for that in any
> other ethdev configurations.
>
Sure you do. Consider the f
05/12/2017 16:13, Ananyev, Konstantin:
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I will give my view on locking and synchronization in a different email.
> > Let's discuss about the API here.
>
> > 05/12/2017 12:12, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > >> From: Matan Azrad [mailto:ma...@mellanox.com]
> >> > From: A
Hi Thomas,
> Hi,
> I will give my view on locking and synchronization in a different email.
> Let's discuss about the API here.
> 05/12/2017 12:12, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> >> From: Matan Azrad [mailto:ma...@mellanox.com]
>> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
>
>> Just forgot to mention - I don' think it is good idea to disallow secondary
>> process to set theowner.
>I think we all agree on that.
>My initial suggestion was to use the ownership in secondary processes.
>I think Matan forbid it as a first step because there is no
>multi-process synchroni
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:53:36PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 05/12/2017 12:44, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > Just forgot to mention - I don' think it is good idea to disallow secondary
> > process to set theowner.
>
> I think we all agree on that.
> My initial suggestion was to use the ownershi
05/12/2017 12:44, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> Just forgot to mention - I don' think it is good idea to disallow secondary
> process to set theowner.
I think we all agree on that.
My initial suggestion was to use the ownership in secondary processes.
I think Matan forbid it as a first step because the
Hi,
I will give my view on locking and synchronization in a different email.
Let's discuss about the API here.
05/12/2017 12:12, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> From: Matan Azrad [mailto:ma...@mellanox.com]
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
> > > If the goal is just to h
> >
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; Wu, Jingjing
> > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > Hi Konstantine
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...
; > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; Wu, Jingjing
> > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Matan,
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org
vet
> > ; Thomas Monjalon ; Wu,
> > Jingjing ; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re:
> > [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 06:10:56PM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > Hi Neil
> > >
> > > > -Original Message---
M
> > > To: Matan Azrad
> > > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin ; Gaëtan Rivet
> > > ; Thomas Monjalon
> ; Wu,
> > > Jingjing ; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 03, 2
Rivet
> > ; Thomas Monjalon ;
> > Wu, Jingjing ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 01:46:49PM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > Hi Konstantine
> > >
> > > > -
er 3, 2017 1:10 PM
> > > To: Matan Azrad ; Neil Horman
> > > ; Gaëtan Rivet
> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; Wu, Jingjing
> > > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> > >
> > >
> > >
&
> ; Gaëtan Rivet
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; Wu, Jingjing
> > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Matan,
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: dev [mailt
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon ; Wu, Jingjing
> > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
> > > Se
2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
>
> Hi
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
> > Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:10 PM
> > To: Gaëtan Rivet
> > Cc: Matan Azrad ; Thomas Monjalon
> > ; Jingjing Wu ;
> &g
Hi
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:10 PM
> To: Gaëtan Rivet
> Cc: Matan Azrad ; Thomas Monjalon
> ; Jingjing Wu ;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port owner
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:24:43PM +0100, Gaëtan Rivet wrote:
> Hello Matan, Neil,
>
> I like the port ownership concept. I think it is needed to clarify some
> operations and should be useful to several subsystems.
>
> This patch could certainly be sub-divided however, and your current 1/5
> sho
Hi Gaetan
> -Original Message-
> From: Gaëtan Rivet [mailto:gaetan.ri...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 5:10 PM
> To: Matan Azrad
> Cc: Neil Horman ; Thomas Monjalon
> ; Jingjing Wu ;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: ad
Monjalon
> > ; Jingjing Wu ;
> > dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add port ownership
> >
> > Hello Matan, Neil,
> >
> > I like the port ownership concept. I think it is needed to clarify some
> > operations and should be usef
Hi all
> -Original Message-
> From: Gaëtan Rivet [mailto:gaetan.ri...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 3:25 PM
> To: Neil Horman
> Cc: Matan Azrad ; Thomas Monjalon
> ; Jingjing Wu ;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] ethdev: add p
Hello Matan, Neil,
I like the port ownership concept. I think it is needed to clarify some
operations and should be useful to several subsystems.
This patch could certainly be sub-divided however, and your current 1/5
should probably come after this one.
Some comments inline.
On Thu, Nov 30, 20
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:57:58AM +, Matan Azrad wrote:
> The ownership of a port is implicit in DPDK.
> Making it explicit is better from the next reasons:
> 1. It may be convenient for multi-process applications to know which
>process is in charge of a port.
> 2. A library could work on
The ownership of a port is implicit in DPDK.
Making it explicit is better from the next reasons:
1. It may be convenient for multi-process applications to know which
process is in charge of a port.
2. A library could work on top of a port.
3. A port can work on top of another port.
Also in the
37 matches
Mail list logo
