From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com (mail-oi0-f49.google.com [209.85.218.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E7E3DC for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:23:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oi0-f49.google.com with SMTP id w10so1154362oie.1 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:23:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wScYGLiTWjluDg6TdlCbS4SB5grZRTvWt7jeCMJrCk4=; b=TKaJczzb6pTR5bN/tu5nEHoMURtej9khsfPFdGcJRiuUsqbomxHmfX2nK6o5A6On09 KI72VV2Wx6aNNpyrSsP/e2TxxFVhfIWO4ILte0qRlpreaEKoNmVtDrZA+y5DLyJ9Bi94 rNzPxJYCifxJJx6sE6THdBzwR5i7JONNv1J8OaK8ZC6ZqWBtjWDJJOvnKeq5ZQkB07Kw cSJt8XUoIHpPtZGM+DVp6Gu+MMhvAr/5q2nDQMNaakUAQLPpf+Cezh+mxvBpIp0fiwCP DuKDZwtvSvN1F4pEM7tLxtQu1eD6x/IcZ61TDzt3WNdlW3lmN7BEKxuajEzvkkLBmcIR FV4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wScYGLiTWjluDg6TdlCbS4SB5grZRTvWt7jeCMJrCk4=; b=UQiYoTpW2WVA+ZrGmw34upxZ9EAzzxQnAAkuaW+r92LwTpTgEmId1Zvc4uK9WR2FqP T5YC8oUVLKUK1U+tbb4/lYI6NfEQdl9gA/kWhCXu0v3TFy3DBMOmPClyTm7TtNYNWojk E/g6/jG2FMiO6ka/FA7p7b7WTVOKt4bip7teYpmCV9MrsZtSBkJE5sYYAAy6PeJPHbix bQk1XYC7iOQdedRmq0E8wB1+mD5s0+O0xefI9/ATRheV8QpzOG0nPZKq4bBZGApaeZAi Cs+2fJBE6pVn26F5Wogs77TEpK2InxCHEyuZqzktfRunW6sE122kPSb0+Rdb4VbUlE/b 4eoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5htxP4xWx2krq89O2MHLSYpae/BgDIDQFnRokFrqKunNFvqTQuR /Tz6VW6sIl0YnJNXVHIedZ9v+WrCynDd X-Received: by 10.202.230.20 with SMTP id d20mr5012468oih.289.1504171392884; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:23:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.33.212 with HTTP; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:23:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1503591622-16232-1-git-send-email-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> <1503591622-16232-3-git-send-email-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> From: Alejandro Lucero Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:23:12 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/16] nfp: add specific pf probe function 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:23:14 -0000 On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 8/24/2017 5:20 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > Configuring the NFP PMD for using the PF requires access through the > > NSPU interface for device configuration. This patch adds a specific probe > > function for the PF which uses the NSPU interface. Just basic NSPU access > > is done by now reading the NSPU ABI version. > > > > No ethernet port is created yet. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero > > <...> > > > + /* Check NSP ABI version */ > > + if (nfp_nsp_get_abi_version(nspu_desc, &major, &minor) < 0) { > > + RTE_LOG(INFO, PMD, "NFP NSP not present\n"); > > + goto no_abi; > > + } > > + PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO, "nspu ABI version: %d.%d\n", major, minor); > > + > > + if (minor < 20) { > > + RTE_LOG(INFO, PMD, "NFP NSP ABI version too old. Required > 0.20 or higher\n"); > > I believe it worth documenting this detail in commit log and documentation. > Ok. > > <...> > > > > > -RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI(net_nfp, rte_nfp_net_pmd); > > -RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI_TABLE(net_nfp, pci_id_nfp_net_map); > > -RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP(net_nfp, "* igb_uio | uio_pci_generic | > vfio-pci"); > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI(net_nfp_pf, rte_nfp_net_pf_pmd); > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI(net_nfp_vf, rte_nfp_net_vf_pmd); > > Now pf and vf drivers are separated. For existing drivers this has been > documented in features file as another file (another column in table), > but we are looking for better representation for this. > > What do you think, does two drivers has significant enough differences > to be documented as two different drivers? > > At this point PF and VF PMDs are exactly the same except for how initialization is done. But, this will likely change in the near future. I did not think about splitting out the features file, but I think it makes sense. The existing one, just for VFs, has a problem with SRIOV. Obviously VF support implies SRIOV, but I think the original idea of such a feature was drivers being able to manage SRIOV, this is, creating and destroying VFs. Also, firmware upload is just available with the PF, although such a feature is not in the current features description list. So, yes, I think I should have a file for the PF PMD and another one for the VF. I will add this in next patch set version. Thanks > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI_TABLE(net_nfp_pf, pci_id_nfp_pf_net_map); > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI_TABLE(net_nfp_vf, pci_id_nfp_vf_net_map); > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP(net_nfp_pf, "* igb_uio | uio_pci_generic | > vfio"); > > +RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP(net_nfp_vf, "* igb_uio | uio_pci_generic | > vfio"); > > > > /* > > * Local variables: > > > >