From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E0CA00BE; Wed, 27 May 2020 23:35:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E589A1DB06; Wed, 27 May 2020 23:35:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net (relay2-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E671DB03; Wed, 27 May 2020 23:35:34 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 86.246.31.132 Received: from u256.net (lfbn-idf2-1-566-132.w86-246.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.246.31.132]) (Authenticated sender: grive@u256.net) by relay2-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 64F7440007; Wed, 27 May 2020 21:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 23:35:25 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ga=C3=ABtan?= Rivet To: Andrew Rybchenko Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ian Dolzhansky , Stephen Hemminger , stable@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20200527213525.euhc2dlilnypmzg5@u256.net> References: <1590590073-8964-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <20200527150711.4geagdtf2f5ipjk5@u256.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/failsafe: report valid RSS RETA size X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 27/05/20 18:30 +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > On 5/27/20 6:07 PM, Gaëtan Rivet wrote: > > On 27/05/20 15:34 +0100, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > >> From: Ian Dolzhansky > >> > >> Failsafe driver has been indicating zero for RSS redirection table size > >> after device info reporting had been reworked. Report proper value. > >> > >> Fixes: 4586be3743d4 ("net/failsafe: fix reported device info") > >> Cc: Stephen Hemminger > >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ian Dolzhansky > >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko > >> --- > >> drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c | 8 ++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > >> index e046cfe6aa..45da9378c3 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > >> @@ -1068,6 +1068,13 @@ fs_dev_merge_info(struct rte_eth_dev_info *info, > >> info->rx_queue_offload_capa &= sinfo->rx_queue_offload_capa; > >> info->tx_queue_offload_capa &= sinfo->tx_queue_offload_capa; > >> info->flow_type_rss_offloads &= sinfo->flow_type_rss_offloads; > >> + > >> + /* > >> + * RETA size is a GCD of RETA sizes indicated by sub-devices. > >> + * Each of these sizes is a power of 2, so use the lower one. > >> + */ > >> + info->reta_size = RTE_MIN(info->reta_size, sinfo->reta_size); > >> + > >> info->hash_key_size = RTE_MIN(info->hash_key_size, > >> sinfo->hash_key_size); > >> > >> @@ -1128,6 +1135,7 @@ fs_dev_infos_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > >> infos->max_hash_mac_addrs = UINT32_MAX; > >> infos->max_vfs = UINT16_MAX; > >> infos->max_vmdq_pools = UINT16_MAX; > >> + infos->reta_size = UINT16_MAX; > >> infos->hash_key_size = UINT8_MAX; > >> > >> /* > >> -- > >> 2.17.1 > >> > > > > Hello Andrew, Ian, > > > > The reta_size info is linked to being able to update the RSS RETA. > > > > I don't think it is a bug for the moment to report 0, as long as > > failsafe does not support RETA update. Now, the reta_update ops could be > > quickly implemented in failsafe, but that should be a new feature. > > > > Did you hit an issue with it? > > Hello Gaetan, > > in our case reta_size is required for RSS testing even if there > is no reta update and query API to estimate where a packet > should be delivered. It assumes that default reta spreads over > all Rx queue evenly. I.e. we need reta size and number of Rx > queues to built default reta. > > May be it is really very testing specific, but IMO logical > anyway. > > Andrew. Alright, given the size of the change there is no reason not to add it if it can improve consistency. I think the patch is fine otherwise, I'm just not sure it should be marked as a bug fix, but backporting won't be hard. Thanks, Acked-by: Gaetan Rivet -- Gaëtan