On 13 October 2016 at 13:44, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Christophe Milard > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 13 October 2016 at 13:20, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Christophe Milard >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 13 October 2016 at 02:44, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Add the odp_dev_id() API used for NUMA support >> >> > >> >> >> >> I am a bit confused here: what is a device? a numa_id or other things >> >> as well? In this patch series everything that relates to numa is >> >> called "device". Shouldn't be called numa_dev when it is a numa >> >> device? >> >> If devices are numa dev only, they should be called numa_dev. If a >> >> device can be anything else (which you general approach seems to >> >> imply), how are they different from handles? >> >> >> >> Not sure I understand where these patches lead to... >> > >> > >> > These patches are just implementing the APIs proposed by Petri during >> > the >> > ODP Design Summit at LAS16. We can consider them RFCs for now if that's >> > preferable. A dev_id in ODP is supposed to be the same as a socket_id in >> > DPDK, but not necessarily tied to the CPU socket config. The intent is >> > simply to have a placeholder where hierarchical NUMA-type identifiers >> > can be >> > obtained and then used as part of resource (pools, etc.) creation. This >> > is >> > inherently system dependent, which is why the odp-linux versions are >> > mostly >> > placeholders, and why I put the implementations under the arch >> > directory. >> > >> >> But still: is this for numa only (in which case I would expect a >> clearer name) or are these devices meant to be used by other things >> (which ones?). And how does this differ from the handles we already >> have for other objects? > > > It's not necessarily NUMA since the intent is to be able to cover multi-SoC > configurations as well. A dev_id differs from a handle because it's a > qualifier. So, for example, an odp_pool_t is the ODP handle for a pool, > however the pool may have a couple of dev_id qualifiers that are used as > part of it's creation (Petri identified pool_id and dram_id as two). > Similarly a crypto_session uses a dev_id to identify a specific crypto > resource bound to that session. For example a system might have four crypto > engines that have different "distance" depending on where the thread is > running and the dev_id would distinguish those.
hmmm interesting... not very clear to me what would be the difference between a handle and a dev. If handles can be references to anything, I don't really see why we wouldn't keep using handles for these things. And I am not sure either having a name as "dev" to cover everything makes it clear. Thanks for answering anyway :-) maybe it will become clearer in the future. > >> >> >> Christophe >> >> >> >> >> >> Christophe. >> >> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> >> >> > --- >> >> > include/odp/api/spec/dev.h | 89 >> >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> > 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+) >> >> > create mode 100644 include/odp/api/spec/dev.h >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/include/odp/api/spec/dev.h b/include/odp/api/spec/dev.h >> >> > new file mode 100644 >> >> > index 0000000..1f7ed8b >> >> > --- /dev/null >> >> > +++ b/include/odp/api/spec/dev.h >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ >> >> > +/* Copyright (c) 2016, Linaro Limited >> >> > + * All rights reserved. >> >> > + * >> >> > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @file >> >> > + * >> >> > + * ODP device >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +#ifndef ODP_API_DEV_H_ >> >> > +#define ODP_API_DEV_H_ >> >> > +#include <odp/visibility_begin.h> >> >> > + >> >> > +#ifdef __cplusplus >> >> > +extern "C" { >> >> > +#endif >> >> > + >> >> > +#include <odp/api/std_types.h> >> >> > + >> >> > +/** @defgroup odp_dev ODP DEVICE >> >> > + * Operations on devices >> >> > + * @{ >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @typedef odp_dev_t >> >> > + * ODP Device >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @def ODP_DEV_NAME_LEN >> >> > + * Maximum device name length in chars >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @def ODP_DEV_ANY >> >> > + * Any device >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @def ODP_DEV_INVALID >> >> > + * Invalid device >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * Get Device ID by Name >> >> > + * >> >> > + * Get an implementation-defined device identifier from a device >> >> > name. >> >> > Device >> >> > + * names are supplied as parameter info (command line, file, etc.) >> >> > to >> >> > the >> >> > + * application. This routine translates this symbolic name into an >> >> > internal >> >> > + * identifier that can be used to define a device connection >> >> > hierarchy >> >> > for >> >> > + * NUMA or other purposes. >> >> > + * >> >> > + * The reserved id ODP_DEV_ANY may be used as a "don't care" >> >> > placeholder >> >> > + * wherever a device id is required. >> >> > + * >> >> > + * @param name Name of the device >> >> > + * >> >> > + * @return Device ID >> >> > + * @retval ODP_DEV_INVALID Device is unknown >> >> > + */ >> >> > +odp_dev_t odp_dev_id(const char *name); >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * Get printable value for an odp_dev_t >> >> > + * >> >> > + * @param hdl odp_dev_t handle to be printed >> >> > + * @return uint64_t value that can be used to print/display this >> >> > + * handle >> >> > + * >> >> > + * @note This routine is intended to be used for diagnostic purposes >> >> > + * to enable applications to generate a printable value that >> >> > represents >> >> > + * an odp_dev_t handle. >> >> > + */ >> >> > +uint64_t odp_dev_to_u64(odp_dev_t hdl); >> >> > + >> >> > +/** >> >> > + * @} >> >> > + */ >> >> > + >> >> > +#ifdef __cplusplus >> >> > +} >> >> > +#endif >> >> > + >> >> > +#include <odp/visibility_end.h> >> >> > +#endif >> >> > -- >> >> > 2.7.4 >> >> > >> > >> > > >
