From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/10] qede: Enable PMD build Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:01:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20160421100110.GB976@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1459476927-21387-1-git-send-email-rasesh.mody@qlogic.com> <4202835.rtEgrshY1X@xps13> <2411922.nRbcghIYQB@xps13> <20160420092502.GB4080@bricha3-MOBL3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Thomas Monjalon , Rasesh Mody , "dev@dpdk.org" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , Ameen Rahman , Sony Chacko To: Harish Patil Return-path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AB6B2C15 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 12:01:15 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 04:43:44PM +0000, Harish Patil wrote: >=20 > >On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:51:06AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> 2016-04-20 00:14, Harish Patil: > >> > >2016-03-31 19:15, Rasesh Mody: > >> > >> --- a/config/common_base > >> > >> +++ b/config/common_base > >> > >> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_QEDE_RX_COAL_US=3D24 > >> > >> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_QEDE_TX_COAL_US=3D48 > >> > > > >> > >It looks to be some tuning which could be done at runtime. Isn't = it? > >> > =20 > >> > That=E2=80=99s right. Can you please suggest if there is any bette= r option to > >>make > >> > it a runtime? There is no PMD API for that. > >>=20 > >> There are some devargs for that. > >> For PCI dev, it can be passed in the whitelist option. > >> We should remove this limitation by having a devargs API (and comman= d > >>line > >> options) independent of whitelisting. > > > >But back to the original setting. Are these likely to be values that a= re > >tunable > >or need to be tunable by the user? >=20 > >=20 > This is a tunable which is equivalent of ethtool -c (in linux) which > controls the rate at which status block is updated. >=20 > >If not, I see little reason to make them > >run-time configurable - they could be defines inside the driver itself= . >=20 > There are defines already which set them to the defaults. The reason to > expose it as config option is that the user don=E2=80=99t have to chang= e the > driver and rather just control it via config file. For now, I can remov= e > it till we find a better alternative to make those run time. Please > confirm and I can have it removed in next patch submission. >=20 Removing config options is always a good thing. As you say we can always = find a way to make them tunable in a later patchset. /Bruce