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 CAC5CA0562; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:14:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F821C0B4; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:14:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f65.google.com (mail-ed1-f65.google.com [209.85.208.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D25E1C08E for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:14:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f65.google.com with SMTP id i7so9034942edq.3 for ; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 05:14:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MJ/bPIgngK44TaGqXXRKxOmK32wqgt/HfhdYxNrRAXQ=; b=yU2mnhoJsf6INiWNlgCFh+7+GCP8dwzqTiTUeu78zYwnF8M9P5hXm4CJEWLyo7QEGe eoJw+DbjMFfrziPTb34HWOC5jkPwcn2h9k+tk0CC31VF41dE6yeEfNU84ufrMKtfJGm4 Aybtl8u4UifbHmbvuxDxvXWRUDvuS89aq429MDthWboJKCnr1hBya7PTvRlqMnjZcNxJ ZZmG8swH1nRsg4HSG+aUqpbixILc9qw7YKXfV5CRs2U63TaIKie9DycgckJfXw+6DX65 tHpWZ/hH9AGq2qXoc8SOo8RLbfnturDfra5VAWx275wVBHSF1wPHusJpp0VolvLa6NQA EQMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MJ/bPIgngK44TaGqXXRKxOmK32wqgt/HfhdYxNrRAXQ=; b=C60UfxBpY+DfhBNO23nIIgar/jjyb+c9lRekzLcNqTk0kbljy6iBXIGPcnkHdr4i6c 9Iyqmi8f5YJQtsVu3Y5QMFS3qBG7akI03SuBa+618HwKrcdqqL3EYVNXNEu/XrA8xboz 0IinWNPOM4R/6zl/cd1U4dcYVRxUUXA3G80eAe8q+nqg4LiVEgjBPbiimp8KxpGkhJ31 zIMWb42eBu64zDRmBLIXqq3IKscXeayFwMiCggFXtmqUn8mi6I3eWljN1qx38ZjwmzDX 5gDFin1vmhbD7CAGbbcp2iR3xQ+XEXhYx9nIZAVMvp+JMSIMpskozHRP8fEhG+g/5tvV c/4A== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaCbRc+6/+thoXRXL2wWwlEBcIRkUC0zpfSnEX63um78kk3eHiU D14xt0DRXqIGy/aiQMX8P2dnD9wge1Fy/bMIga7TRQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypImdRXqt3f+OVspYtcu/F0iuM3QWh0psj7Cs6YEo4mlxv8PqwOGgXyyWix2FCy5E2lFy2E4WxQDDZopyyYo8fU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d8cd:: with SMTP id re13mr7853953ejb.62.1585916096005; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 05:14:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200401142127.13715-1-mk@semihalf.com> <20200401142127.13715-12-mk@semihalf.com> <0c4c2200-d78f-0af0-2496-747f8629188b@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <0c4c2200-d78f-0af0-2496-747f8629188b@intel.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Krawczyk?= Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:14:44 +0200 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Marcin Wojtas , Maciej Bielski , "Tzalik, Guy" , "Schmeilin, Evgeny" , "Chauskin, Igor" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 11/29] net/ena/base: use 48-bit memory addresses in ena_com 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" czw., 2 kwi 2020 o 14:55 Ferruh Yigit napisa=C5=82= (a): > > On 4/1/2020 3:21 PM, Michal Krawczyk wrote: > > ENA device is using 48-bit memory for IO. because of that, the upper > > limit had to be updated. > > What is the impact of this change, and what is the reason of the change? = Can you > please explain in the commit log? > It's just a cosmetic change in our case and to align it with what the device is in fact doing. Structure 'ena_common_mem_addr' could be misleading - it was defining 64 bits for address, while the device in fact could read up to 48 bits. This value (address) is being verified before being set in 'ena_com_mem_addr_set()' function, so the functionality remains still the same. I'll update the commit log in v3.