* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info @ 2016-11-18 15:04 Alejandro Lucero [not found] ` <20161118150433.AD575558B@dpdk.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev Previous reported speed was hardcoded. Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> --- drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h | 13 +++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c index c6b1587..d5ec0ff 100644 --- a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c +++ b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c @@ -803,6 +803,7 @@ static void nfp_net_read_mac(struct nfp_net_hw *hw) hw->ctrl = new_ctrl; } +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) /* * return 0 means link status changed, -1 means not changed * @@ -816,6 +817,18 @@ static void nfp_net_read_mac(struct nfp_net_hw *hw) struct rte_eth_link link, old; uint32_t nn_link_status; + static const uint32_t ls_to_ethtool[] = { + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_UNSUPPORTED] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_UNKNOWN] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_1G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_1G, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_10G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_10G, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_25G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_25G, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_40G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_40G, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_50G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_50G, + [NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_100G] = ETH_SPEED_NUM_100G, + }; + + PMD_DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "Link update\n"); hw = NFP_NET_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private); @@ -831,8 +844,22 @@ static void nfp_net_read_mac(struct nfp_net_hw *hw) link.link_status = ETH_LINK_UP; link.link_duplex = ETH_LINK_FULL_DUPLEX; - /* Other cards can limit the tx and rx rate per VF */ - link.link_speed = ETH_SPEED_NUM_40G; + + nn_link_status = (nn_link_status >> NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_SHIFT) & + NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_MASK; + + if ((NFD_CFG_MAJOR_VERSION_of(hw->ver) < 4) || + ((NFD_CFG_MINOR_VERSION_of(hw->ver) == 4) && + (NFD_CFG_MINOR_VERSION_of(hw->ver) == 0))) + link.link_speed = ETH_SPEED_NUM_40G; + else { + + if (nn_link_status == NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_UNKNOWN || + nn_link_status >= ARRAY_SIZE(ls_to_ethtool)) + link.link_speed = ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE; + else + link.link_speed = ls_to_ethtool[nn_link_status]; + } if (old.link_status != link.link_status) { nfp_net_dev_atomic_write_link_status(dev, &link); diff --git a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h index fce8251..f9aaba3 100644 --- a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h +++ b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h @@ -157,6 +157,19 @@ #define NFP_NET_CFG_VERSION_MINOR(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 0) #define NFP_NET_CFG_STS 0x0034 #define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK (0x1 << 0) /* Link up or down */ +/* Link rate */ +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_SHIFT 1 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_MASK 0xF +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE \ + (NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_MASK << NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_SHIFT) +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_UNSUPPORTED 0 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_UNKNOWN 1 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_1G 2 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_10G 3 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_25G 4 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_40G 5 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_50G 6 +#define NFP_NET_CFG_STS_LINK_RATE_100G 7 #define NFP_NET_CFG_CAP 0x0038 #define NFP_NET_CFG_MAX_TXRINGS 0x003c #define NFP_NET_CFG_MAX_RXRINGS 0x0040 -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20161118150433.AD575558B@dpdk.org>]
* [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info [not found] ` <20161118150433.AD575558B@dpdk.org> @ 2016-11-18 15:10 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:26 ` Ferruh Yigit 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Monjalon, dev Hi Thomas, I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those warnings. Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info To: test-report@dpdk.org Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 _coding style issues_ CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible side-effects? #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: + else { + total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:10 ` [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| " Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:34 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-11-18 15:26 ` Ferruh Yigit 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-11-18 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alejandro Lucero, Thomas Monjalon, dev On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > warnings. > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? I am also getting same warnings as below, this can be related to the checkpatch.pl version. I have: Version: 0.32 (./scripts/checkpatch.pl --version) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM > Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info > To: test-report@dpdk.org > Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> > > > Test-Label: checkpatch > Test-Status: WARNING > http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 > > _coding style issues_ > > > CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible side-effects? > #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: > +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) > > CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' > #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: > + else { > + > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:42 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:44 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-11-18 15:34 ` Thomas Monjalon 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ferruh Yigit; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote: > On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > > warnings. > > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? > > I am also getting same warnings as below, this can be related to the > checkpatch.pl version. > > I have: Version: 0.32 > (./scripts/checkpatch.pl --version) > > Uhmm, I got same one. > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> > > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM > > Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info > > To: test-report@dpdk.org > > Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> > > > > > > Test-Label: checkpatch > > Test-Status: WARNING > > http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 > > > > _coding style issues_ > > > > > > CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible > side-effects? > > #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: > > +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) > > > > CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' > > #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: > > + else { > > + > > > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:42 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:44 ` Thomas Monjalon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ferruh Yigit; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Alejandro Lucero < alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> > wrote: > >> On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: >> > Hi Thomas, >> > >> > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. >> > >> > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those >> > warnings. >> > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? >> >> I am also getting same warnings as below, this can be related to the >> checkpatch.pl version. >> >> I have: Version: 0.32 >> (./scripts/checkpatch.pl --version) >> >> > Uhmm, I got same one. > > Ok. It seems I suffered a temporal blindness. I though the automatic report was about warnings but it is about checks. But I got just one of the checks messages. This is the output with -v and adding OPTIONS used: ### [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info OPTIONS: --no-tree --max-line-length=80 --show-types --ignore=LINUX_VERSION_CODE,FILE_PATH_CHANGES,VOLATILE,PREFER_PACKED,PREFER_ALIGNED,PREFER_PRINTF,PREFER_KERNEL_TYPES,BIT_MACRO,CONST_STRUCT,SPLIT_STRING,LINE_SPACING,PARENTHESIS_ALIGNMENT,NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE,NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' #60: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: + else { + total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 1 checks, 68 lines checked 0/1 valid patch > > >> > >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> > From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> >> > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM >> > Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info >> > To: test-report@dpdk.org >> > Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> >> > >> > >> > Test-Label: checkpatch >> > Test-Status: WARNING >> > http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 >> > >> > _coding style issues_ >> > >> > >> > CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible >> side-effects? >> > #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: >> > +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) >> > >> > CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' >> > #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: >> > + else { >> > + >> > >> > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked >> > >> >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:42 ` Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:44 ` Thomas Monjalon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-11-18 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alejandro Lucero; +Cc: Ferruh Yigit, dev 2016-11-18 15:31, Alejandro Lucero: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> > wrote: > > > On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > > > > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > > > warnings. > > > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? > > > > I am also getting same warnings as below, this can be related to the > > checkpatch.pl version. > > > > I have: Version: 0.32 > > (./scripts/checkpatch.pl --version) > > > Uhmm, I got same one. The last update of this version number is from 2011... I guess we have to live without checkpatch versioning. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:34 ` Thomas Monjalon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-11-18 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alejandro Lucero; +Cc: Ferruh Yigit, dev 2016-11-18 15:24, Ferruh Yigit: > On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > > warnings. > > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? > > I am also getting same warnings as below, this can be related to the > checkpatch.pl version. > > I have: Version: 0.32 > (./scripts/checkpatch.pl --version) Yes checkpatch@dpdk.org uses the version 0.32. I could try to add it in the mail report. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:10 ` [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| " Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-11-18 15:26 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:33 ` Alejandro Lucero 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-11-18 15:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alejandro Lucero, Thomas Monjalon, dev On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > warnings. > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM > Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info > To: test-report@dpdk.org > Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> > > > Test-Label: checkpatch > Test-Status: WARNING > http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 > > _coding style issues_ > > > CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible side-effects? > #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: > +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) btw, you can benefit from RTE_DIM: lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h:352: #define RTE_DIM(a) (sizeof (a) / sizeof ((a)[0])) > > CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' > #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: > + else { > + > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info 2016-11-18 15:26 ` Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-11-18 15:33 ` Alejandro Lucero 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Alejandro Lucero @ 2016-11-18 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ferruh Yigit; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote: > On 11/18/2016 3:10 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > I got this email when sending a patch some minutes ago. > > > > The point is I trusted script/checkpatches.sh which did not report those > > warnings. > > Am I doing anything wrong when using checkpatches.sh? > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: <checkpatch@dpdk.org> > > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM > > Subject: |WARNING| [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info > > To: test-report@dpdk.org > > Cc: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> > > > > > > Test-Label: checkpatch > > Test-Status: WARNING > > http://dpdk.org/patch/17091 > > > > _coding style issues_ > > > > > > CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'arr' - possible > side-effects? > > #53: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:806: > > +#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) > > btw, you can benefit from RTE_DIM: > > lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h:352: > #define RTE_DIM(a) (sizeof (a) / sizeof ((a)[0])) > > Thanks! I will use it in the next patch version. > > > > CHECK:BRACES: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{' > > #91: FILE: drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c:856: > > + else { > > + > > > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 68 lines checked > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-11-18 15:44 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-11-18 15:04 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] nfp: report link speed using hardware info Alejandro Lucero [not found] ` <20161118150433.AD575558B@dpdk.org> 2016-11-18 15:10 ` [dpdk-dev] Fwd: |WARNING| " Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:24 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:31 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:42 ` Alejandro Lucero 2016-11-18 15:44 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-11-18 15:34 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-11-18 15:26 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-11-18 15:33 ` Alejandro Lucero
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).