Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] app/test-eventdev: add Tx adapter support

[Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>]

On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 12:24:18PM +0530, Rao, Nikhil wrote:
> On 9/4/2018 7:42 PM, Pavan Nikhilesh wrote:
> > Convert existing Tx service based pipeline to Tx adapter based APIs and
> > simplify worker functions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> > ---
> >   app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_atq.c    | 269 ++++++++++++-----------
> >   app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.c | 206 +++++------------
> >   app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.h |  62 +++---
> >   app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_queue.c  | 241 ++++++++++----------
> >   4 files changed, 367 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.c b/app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.c
> > index 832ab8b6e..ab407dbbb 100644
> > --- a/app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.c
> > +++ b/app/test-eventdev/test_pipeline_common.c
> > @@ -5,58 +5,6 @@
> >
> >
> > @@ -215,7 +160,6 @@ pipeline_ethdev_setup(struct evt_test *test, struct evt_options *opt)
> >   {
> >       uint16_t i;
> >       uint8_t nb_queues = 1;
> > -     uint8_t mt_state = 0;
> >       struct test_pipeline *t = evt_test_priv(test);
> >       struct rte_eth_rxconf rx_conf;
> >       struct rte_eth_conf port_conf = {
> > @@ -238,13 +182,21 @@ pipeline_ethdev_setup(struct evt_test *test, struct evt_options *opt)
> >               return -ENODEV;
> >       }
> >
> > +     t->internal_port = 0;
> >       RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i) {
> >               struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info;
> >               struct rte_eth_conf local_port_conf = port_conf;
> > +             uint32_t caps = 0;
> > +
> > +             rte_event_eth_tx_adapter_caps_get(opt->dev_id, i, &caps);
> > +             if ((caps & RTE_EVENT_ETH_TX_ADAPTER_CAP_INTERNAL_PORT)) {
> > +                     t->internal_port = 1;
> > +             } else if (t->internal_port == 1) {
> > +                     evt_err("Eventdev can't use %d port", i);
> > +                     return -EINVAL;
> > +             }
> >
> Shouldn't this function also return -EINVAL for the case where
> internal_port = 0 for i = 0, and internal_port = 1 for i = 1 ?

I think it would be better to force all the ports to use the non-internal cap
mode when we detect that one of the port doesn't have internal port capability
rather than exiting. This was the behaviour previously it will leave room to
support both the pipeline models in future.

>
> Nikhil
>

Thanks,
Pavan.