RE: [PATCH v5 0/7] bbdev changes for 22.11
From: Chautru, Nicolas <hidden>
Date: 2022-08-15 17:55:03
Hi Hemant, Could you please provide a +1 for that serie please? This has been under review for a while but would like to get it merged soon if possible. I believe you had already reviewed and acked a previous version. Much appreciated, thanks, Nic
-----Original Message----- From: Chautru, Nicolas <redacted> Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2022 4:28 PM To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas@monjalon.net; gakhil@marvell.com; hemant.agrawal@nxp.com Cc: maxime.coquelin@redhat.com; trix@redhat.com; mdr@ashroe.eu; Richardson, Bruce [off-list ref]; david.marchand@redhat.com; stephen@networkplumber.org; Chautru, Nicolas [off-list ref] Subject: [PATCH v5 0/7] bbdev changes for 22.11 v5: update base on review from Tom Rix. Number of typos reported and resolved, removed the commit related to rw_lock for now, added a commit for code clean up from review, resolved one rebase issue between 2 commits, used size of array for some bound check implementation. Thanks. v4: update to the last 2 commits to include function to print the queue status and a fix to the rte_lock within the wrong structure v3: update to device status info to also use padded size for the related array. Adding also 2 additionals commits to allow the API struc to expose more information related to queues corner cases/warning as well as an optional rw lock. Hemant, Maxime, this is planned for DPDK 21.11 but would like review/ack early is possible to get this applied earlier and due to time off this summer. Thanks Nic -- Hi, Agregating together in a single serie a number of bbdev api changes previously submitted over the last few months and all targeted for 22.11 (4 different series detailed below). Related deprecation notice being pushed in 22.07 in parallel. * bbdev: add device status info * bbdev: add new operation for FFT processing * bbdev: add device info on queue topology * bbdev: allow operation type enum for growth v2: Update to the RTE_BBDEV_COUNT removal based on feedback from Thomas/Stephen : rejecting out of range op type and adjusting the new name for the padded maximum value used for fixed size arrays. --- Previous cover letters agregated below: * bbdev: add device status info https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=23367 The updated structure will allow PMDs to expose through info_get what be may the status of the underlying accelerator, notably in case an HW error event having happened. * bbdev: add new operation for FFT processing https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=22111 This contribution adds a new operation type to the existing ones already supported by the bbdev PMDs. This set of operation is FFT-based processing for 5GNR baseband processing acceleration. This operates in the same lookaside fashion as other existing bbdev operation with a dedicated set of capabilities and parameters (marked as experimental). I plan to also include a new PMD supporting this operation (and most of the related capabilities) in the next couple of months (either in 22.06 or 22.09) as well as extending the related bbdev-test. * bbdev: add device info on queue topology https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=22076 Addressing an historical concern that the device info struct only imperfectly captured what queues are available on the device (number of operation and priority). This ended up being an iterative process for application to find each queue could be configured. ie. the gap was captured as technical debt previously in comments /* This isn't ideal because it reports the maximum number of queues but * does not provide info on how many can be uplink/downlink or different * priorities */ This is now being exposed explictly based on the what the device actually supports using the existing info_get api * bbdev: allow operation type enum for growth https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=23509 This is related to the general intent to remove using MAX value for enums. There is consensus that we should avoid this for a while notably for future- proofed ABI concerns https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20200130142003.2645765-1- ferruh.yigit@intel.com/. But still there is arguably not yet an explicit best recommendation to handle this especially when we actualy need to expose array whose index is such an enum. As a specific example here I am refering to RTE_BBDEV_OP_TYPE_COUNT in enum rte_bbdev_op_type which is being extended for new operation type being support in bbdev (such as https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1646956157-245769-2-git- send-email-nicolas.chautru@intel.com/ adding new FFT operation) There is also the intent to be able to expose information for each operation type through the bbdev api such as dynamically configured queues information per such operation type https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1646785355-168133-2-git- send-email-nicolas.chautru@intel.com/ Basically we are considering best way to accomodate for this, notably based on discussions with Ray Kinsella and Bruce Richardson, to handle such a case moving forward: specifically for the example with RTE_BBDEV_OP_TYPE_COUNT and also more generally. One possible option is captured in that patchset and is basically based on the simple principle to allow for growth and prevent ABI breakage. Ie. the last value of the enum is set with a higher value than required so that to allow insertion of new enum outside of the major ABI versions. In that case the RTE_BBDEV_OP_TYPE_COUNT is still present and can be exposed and used while still allowing for addition thanks to the implicit padding-like room. As an alternate variant, instead of using that last enum value, that extended size could be exposed as an #define outside of the enum but would be fundamentally the same (public). Another option would be to avoid array alltogether and use each time this a new dedicated API function (operation type enum being an input argument instead of an index to an array in an existing structure so that to get access to structure related to a given operation type enum) but that is arguably not well scalable within DPDK to use such a scheme for each enums and keep an uncluttered and clean API. In that very example that would be very odd indeed not to get this simply from info_get(). Some pros and cons, arguably the simple option in that patchset is a valid compromise option and a step in the right direction but we would like to know your view wrt best recommendation, or any other thought. Nicolas Chautru (7): bbdev: allow operation type enum for growth bbdev: add device status info bbdev: add device info on queue topology drivers/baseband: update PMDs to expose queue per operation bbdev: add new operation for FFT processing bbdev: add queue related warning and status information bbdev: remove unnecessary if-check app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c | 2 +- app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 6 +- doc/guides/prog_guide/bbdev.rst | 130 +++++++++++++++++ drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c | 30 ++-- drivers/baseband/fpga_5gnr_fec/rte_fpga_5gnr_fec.c | 9 ++ drivers/baseband/fpga_lte_fec/fpga_lte_fec.c | 9 ++ drivers/baseband/la12xx/bbdev_la12xx.c | 10 +- drivers/baseband/null/bbdev_null.c | 1 + drivers/baseband/turbo_sw/bbdev_turbo_software.c | 12 ++ examples/bbdev_app/main.c | 2 +- lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev.c | 57 +++++++- lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev.h | 149 +++++++++++++++++++- lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h | 156 ++++++++++++++++++++- lib/bbdev/version.map | 11 ++ 14 files changed, 555 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) -- 1.8.3.1