> > Hi Abhinandan,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In case an event from a previous stage is required to be
> > > > > > forwarded to a crypto adapter and PMD supports internal event
> > > > > > port in crypto adapter, exposed via capability
> > > > > > RTE_EVENT_CRYPTO_ADAPTER_CAP_INTERNAL_PORT_OP_FWD, we
> > do
> > > > not have a
> > > > > > way to check in the API rte_event_enqueue_burst(), whether it is
> > > > > > for crypto adapter or for eth tx adapter.
> > > > > I may be missing something here. Crypto adapter is an atomic stage
> > > > > has a port which is setup during the adapter configuration.
> > > > > So, application enqueuing events will end up sending to the crypto
> > > > > adapter (As the adapter dequeues from a specific port).
> > > > > Still wondering why there is requirement for new API.
> > > >
> > > > While we do rte_event_enqueue_burst(), we do not have a way to
> > > > identify whether The event is for crypto adapter or the eth adaptor.
> > > > At the application layer, we know where to send the event, but in
> > > > the event lib We do not know which port it need to be sent.
> > > > IMO, event port is specifically designed to work for OP_NEW mode.
> > > > I did not find a way to make it land into crypto adapter.
> > > > Please let me know in case there is a better option other than
> > > > adding a new API.
> > > This looks like a hack as the new API does not actual enqueue events
> > > to eventdev.
> > > Rather it directly extracts the crypto info from each event and then
> > > enqueue to cryptodev.
> > >
> > > How about doing this (No changes to rte_event_enqueue_burst(), PMD
> > > takes care of things ):
> > > uint16_t __rte_hot
> > > ssows_enq_burst(void *port, const struct rte_event ev[], uint16_t
> > > nb_events) {
> > > + struct otx2_ssogws *ws = port;
> > > +
> > > + RTE_SET_USED(nb_events);
> > > +
> > > + if (cap &
> > > RTE_EVENT_CRYPTO_ADAPTER_CAP_INTERNAL_PORT_OP_FWD)
> > > + return otx2_ca_enq(ws->tag_op, ev);
> > >
> > > return ssows_enq(port, ev);
> > > }
> > >
> > > Everything will be hidden under the callback and application will not
> > > have any changes.
> > >
> > You want to say we somehow save a flag in struct otx2_ssogws from the
> > capability And check that flag here to enq to crypto. But that will not
> > work,
> as
> > the events coming In this API can be for both crypto as well as eth tx
> adapter.
> > If this check is there, all events will go to crypto adapter.
> >
> > In the library or the driver, we do not have a mechanism to determine the
> > destination of the event (Note that event type is for source of event and
> not
> > destination).
> > Using some fields of rte_event will be a hack IMO.
> >
> > The solution proposed in this patchset is not a hack. Here is a reasoning to
> it:
> > - The application when dequeues an event from the previous stage, knows
> > what to do with the event - send it to crypto or send to ethernet. Hence it
> > makes sense to call the different API there itself as inside the
> > rte_event_enqueue_burst() there is no way to determine if it is for crypto
> > adapter or eth adapter.
> > Moreover, the solution is very similar to what eth tx adapter already
> support
> > (a new API to enqueue).
> >
> > I hope this make things clearer now.
> Yes Akhil. This makes it more clear. Thanks for clarifying.
Do you have any further comments on this patchset? If not, could you please ack
it?
