[PATCH v6 1/4] ethdev: add API for mbufs recycle mode

[Feifei Wang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at amd.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 8:01 AM
> To: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at huawei.com>; Feifei Wang
> <Feifei.Wang2 at arm.com>; Константин Ананьев
> <konstantin.v.ananyev at yandex.ru>; thomas at monjalon.net; Andrew
> Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko at oktetlabs.ru>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; nd <nd at arm.com>; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com>; Ruifeng Wang
> <Ruifeng.Wang at arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] ethdev: add API for mbufs recycle mode
> 
> On 6/6/2023 9:34 AM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>>> Probably I am missing something, but why it is not possible to do
> >>>> something
> >>> like that:
> >>>>
> >>>> rte_eth_recycle_mbufs(rx_port_id=X, rx_queue_id=Y, tx_port_id=N,
> >>>> tx_queue_id=M, ...); ....
> >>>> rte_eth_recycle_mbufs(rx_port_id=X, rx_queue_id=Y, tx_port_id=N,
> >>>> tx_queue_id=K, ...);
> >>>>
> >>>> I.E. feed rx queue from 2 tx queues?
> >>>>
> >>>> Two problems for this:
> >>>> 1. If we have 2 tx queues for rx, the thread should make the extra
> >>>> judgement to decide which one to choose in the driver layer.
> >>>
> >>> Not sure, why on the driver layer?
> >>> The example I gave above - decision is made on application layer.
> >>> Lets say first call didn't free enough mbufs, so app decided to use
> >>> second txq for rearm.
> >> [Feifei] I think currently mbuf recycle mode can support this usage. For
> examples:
> >> n =  rte_eth_recycle_mbufs(rx_port_id=X, rx_queue_id=Y, tx_port_id=N,
> >> tx_queue_id=M, ...); if (n < planned_number)
> >> rte_eth_recycle_mbufs(rx_port_id=X, rx_queue_id=Y, tx_port_id=N,
> >> tx_queue_id=K, ...);
> >>
> >> Thus, if users want, they can do like this.
> >
> > Yes, that was my thought, that's why I was surprise that in the comments we
> have:
> > " Currently, the rte_eth_recycle_mbufs() function can only support
> > one-time pairing
> > * between the receive queue and transmit queue. Do not pair one
> > receive queue with
> >  * multiple transmit queues or pair one transmit queue with multiple
> > receive queues,
> >  * in order to avoid memory error rewriting."
> >
> 
> I guess that is from previous versions of the set, it can be good to address
> limitations/restrictions again with latest version.

[Feifei]  Sorry, I think this is due to my ambiguous expression in function description.
I wanted to show 'mbufs_recycle' cannot support multiple threads.

I will change the description and add extra expression to tell users that they
can change config from one txq to another in single thread.
Thanks for the comments. 

> 
> 
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> On the other hand, current mechanism can support users to switch 1
> >>>> txq to another timely in the application layer. If user want to
> >>>> choose another txq, he just need to change the txq_queue_id parameter
> in the API.
> >>>> 2. If you want one rxq to support two txq at the same time, this
> >>>> needs to add spinlock on guard variable to avoid multi-thread conflict.
> >>>> Spinlock will decrease the data-path performance greatly.  Thus, we
> >>>> do not consider
> >>>> 1 rxq mapping multiple txqs here.
> >>>
> >>> I am talking about situation when one thread controls 2 tx queues.
> >>>
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * @param rx_port_id
> >>>> + * Port identifying the receive side.
> >>>> + * @param rx_queue_id
> >>>> + * The index of the receive queue identifying the receive side.
> >>>> + * The value must be in the range [0, nb_rx_queue - 1] previously
> >>>> +supplied
> >>>> + * to rte_eth_dev_configure().
> >>>> + * @param tx_port_id
> >>>> + * Port identifying the transmit side.
> >>>> + * @param tx_queue_id
> >>>> + * The index of the transmit queue identifying the transmit side.
> >>>> + * The value must be in the range [0, nb_tx_queue - 1] previously
> >>>> +supplied
> >>>> + * to rte_eth_dev_configure().
> >>>> + * @param recycle_rxq_info
> >>>> + * A pointer to a structure of type *rte_eth_recycle_rxq_info*
> >>>> +which contains
> >>>> + * the information of the Rx queue mbuf ring.
> >>>> + * @return
> >>>> + * The number of recycling mbufs.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +__rte_experimental
> >>>> +static inline uint16_t
> >>>> +rte_eth_recycle_mbufs(uint16_t rx_port_id, uint16_t rx_queue_id,
> >>>> +uint16_t tx_port_id, uint16_t tx_queue_id,  struct
> >>>> +rte_eth_recycle_rxq_info *recycle_rxq_info) {  struct
> >>>> +rte_eth_fp_ops *p;  void *qd;  uint16_t nb_mbufs;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_DEBUG_TX
> >>>> + if (tx_port_id >= RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS ||  tx_queue_id >=
> >>>> +RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT) {  RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,  "Invalid
> >>>> +tx_port_id=%u or tx_queue_id=%u\n",  tx_port_id, tx_queue_id);
> >>>> +return 0;  } #endif
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* fetch pointer to queue data */ p =
> >>>> + &rte_eth_fp_ops[tx_port_id]; qd = p->txq.data[tx_queue_id];
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_DEBUG_TX
> >>>> + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(tx_port_id, 0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (qd == NULL) {
> >>>> + RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid Tx queue_id=%u for port_id=%u\n",
> >>>> +tx_queue_id, tx_port_id);  return 0;  } #endif  if
> >>>> +(p->recycle_tx_mbufs_reuse == NULL)  return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Copy used *rte_mbuf* buffer pointers from Tx mbuf ring
> >>>> + * into Rx mbuf ring.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + nb_mbufs = p->recycle_tx_mbufs_reuse(qd, recycle_rxq_info);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* If no recycling mbufs, return 0. */ if (nb_mbufs == 0) return
> >>>> + 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_DEBUG_RX
> >>>> + if (rx_port_id >= RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS ||  rx_queue_id >=
> >>>> +RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT) {  RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid
> >>>> +rx_port_id=%u or rx_queue_id=%u\n",  rx_port_id, rx_queue_id);
> >>>> +return 0;  } #endif
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* fetch pointer to queue data */ p =
> >>>> + &rte_eth_fp_ops[rx_port_id]; qd = p->rxq.data[rx_queue_id];
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_DEBUG_RX
> >>>> + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(rx_port_id, 0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (qd == NULL) {
> >>>> + RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid Rx queue_id=%u for port_id=%u\n",
> >>>> +rx_queue_id, rx_port_id);  return 0;  } #endif
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (p->recycle_rx_descriptors_refill == NULL) return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Replenish the Rx descriptors with the recycling
> >>>> + * into Rx mbuf ring.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + p->recycle_rx_descriptors_refill(qd, nb_mbufs);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return nb_mbufs;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>>  /**
> >>>>   * @warning
> >>>>   * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice diff
> >>>> --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev_core.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev_core.h
> >>>> index dcf8adab92..a2e6ea6b6c 100644
> >>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev_core.h
> >>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev_core.h
> >>>> @@ -56,6 +56,13 @@ typedef int (*eth_rx_descriptor_status_t)(void
> >>>> *rxq, uint16_t offset);
> >>>>  /** @internal Check the status of a Tx descriptor */  typedef int
> >>>> (*eth_tx_descriptor_status_t)(void *txq, uint16_t offset);
> >>>>
> >>>> +/** @internal Copy used mbufs from Tx mbuf ring into Rx mbuf ring
> >>>> +*/ typedef uint16_t (*eth_recycle_tx_mbufs_reuse_t)(void *txq,
> >>>> +struct rte_eth_recycle_rxq_info *recycle_rxq_info);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/** @internal Refill Rx descriptors with the recycling mbufs */
> >>>> +typedef void (*eth_recycle_rx_descriptors_refill_t)(void *rxq,
> >>>> +uint16_t nb);
> >>>> +
> >>>>  /**
> >>>>   * @internal
> >>>>   * Structure used to hold opaque pointers to internal ethdev Rx/Tx
> >>>> @@
> >>>> -90,9 +97,11 @@ struct rte_eth_fp_ops {
> >>>>          eth_rx_queue_count_t rx_queue_count;
> >>>>          /** Check the status of a Rx descriptor. */
> >>>>          eth_rx_descriptor_status_t rx_descriptor_status;
> >>>> + /** Refill Rx descriptors with the recycling mbufs. */
> >>>> + eth_recycle_rx_descriptors_refill_t
> >>>> + recycle_rx_descriptors_refill;
> >>>> I am afraid we can't put new fields here without ABI breakage.
> >>>>
> >>>> Agree
> >>>>
> >>>> It has to be below rxq.
> >>>> Now thinking about current layout probably not the best one, and
> >>>> when introducing this struct, I should probably put rxq either on
> >>>> the top of the struct, or on the next cache line.
> >>>> But such change is not possible right now anyway.
> >>>> Same story for txq.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thus we should rearrange the structure like below：
> >>>> struct rte_eth_fp_ops {
> >>>>     struct rte_ethdev_qdata rxq;
> >>>>          eth_rx_burst_t rx_pkt_burst;
> >>>>          eth_rx_queue_count_t rx_queue_count;
> >>>>          eth_rx_descriptor_status_t rx_descriptor_status;
> >>>>        eth_recycle_rx_descriptors_refill_t recycle_rx_descriptors_refill;
> >>>>               uintptr_t reserved1[2]; }
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I think such layout will be better.
> >>> The only problem here - we have to wait for 23.11 for that.
> >>>
> >> Ok, if not this change, maybe we still need to wait. Because
> >> mbufs_recycle have other ABI breakage. Such as the change for 'struct
> rte_eth_dev'.
> >
> > Ok by me.
> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>          /** Rx queues data. */
> >>>>          struct rte_ethdev_qdata rxq;
> >>>> - uintptr_t reserved1[3];
> >>>> + uintptr_t reserved1[2];
> >>>>          /**@}*/
> >>>>
> >>>>          /**@{*/
> >>>> @@ -106,9 +115,11 @@ struct rte_eth_fp_ops {
> >>>>          eth_tx_prep_t tx_pkt_prepare;
> >>>>          /** Check the status of a Tx descriptor. */
> >>>>          eth_tx_descriptor_status_t tx_descriptor_status;
> >>>> + /** Copy used mbufs from Tx mbuf ring into Rx. */
> >>>> + eth_recycle_tx_mbufs_reuse_t recycle_tx_mbufs_reuse;
> >>>>          /** Tx queues data. */
> >>>>          struct rte_ethdev_qdata txq;
> >>>> - uintptr_t reserved2[3];
> >>>> + uintptr_t reserved2[2];
> >>>>          /**@}*/
> >>>>
> >>>>  } __rte_cache_aligned;
> >>>> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/version.map b/lib/ethdev/version.map index
> >>>> 357d1a88c0..45c417f6bd 100644
> >>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/version.map
> >>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/version.map
> >>>> @@ -299,6 +299,10 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
> >>>>          rte_flow_action_handle_query_update;
> >>>>          rte_flow_async_action_handle_query_update;
> >>>>          rte_flow_async_create_by_index;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + # added in 23.07
> >>>> + rte_eth_recycle_mbufs;
> >>>> + rte_eth_recycle_rx_queue_info_get;
> >>>>  };
> >>>>
> >>>>  INTERNAL {
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.25.1
> >>>>