From: Marc <marcdevel@gmail.com>
To: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] nfp: extend speed capabilities advertised
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 17:35:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAExC=0SLV7qa5kzS6-UESSYNHq3wqQ3vZrV54btNnMi2kbXhiA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD+H992J5mossfmWG1wq-1YE=12uAQq-R8STX-G42vv13--GBQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 19 December 2016 at 17:18, Alejandro Lucero <
alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 12/19/2016 3:02 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> > > <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alejandro,
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/19/2016 12:05 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote:
> > > > NFP supports more speeds than just 40 and 100GB, which were
> > > > what was advertised before.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com
> > <mailto:alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c | 4 +++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c
> b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c
> > > > index 27afbfd..77015c4 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c
> > > > @@ -1077,7 +1077,9 @@ static void nfp_net_read_mac(struct
> > nfp_net_hw *hw)
> > > > dev_info->reta_size = NFP_NET_CFG_RSS_ITBL_SZ;
> > > > dev_info->hash_key_size = NFP_NET_CFG_RSS_KEY_SZ;
> > > >
> > > > - dev_info->speed_capa = ETH_LINK_SPEED_40G |
> > ETH_LINK_SPEED_100G;
> > > > + dev_info->speed_capa = ETH_SPEED_NUM_1G |
> ETH_LINK_SPEED_10G
> > |
> > > > + ETH_SPEED_NUM_25G |
> ETH_SPEED_NUM_40G
> > |
> > > > + ETH_SPEED_NUM_50G |
> > ETH_LINK_SPEED_100G;
> > >
> > > Does all devices driver by this driver supports all these speeds?
> > >
> > > I am aware of at least one exception to this, from previous patch
> > [1],
> > > should we take that into account?
> > >
> > >
> > > So we have different NFP devices and different firmwares.
> > > NFP by design support all those speeds, but the PMD relies on the
> > > firmware for being able to know which is the current configured speed
> > > after link negotiation. PMD development was done with a specific
> > > firmware, and I was told to just report such speed by default. Last
> > > firmware versions give that speed info, but old firmware versions do
> not.
> > >
> > > So, all devices support such a speed range, indeed PMD works with any
> of
> > > them, but reported speed is always 40G with old firmware. This is a
> > > firmware limitation but we have to support old and new firmware.
> >
> > But this information to the application will be wrong for some (old) FW.
> > What do you think checking the FW version here and report capability
> > based on what FW supports?
> >
> >
> The driver advertises the right speed range supported. The problem is with
> the report about the current link speed configured.
> Maybe, is the right thing to do here to not report the current link speed
> because the driver really does not know about it?
>
> If you agree with this, I'm afraid the just accepted patch about the link
> report needs to be modified.
>
Alejandro,
If negociated link state has to be changed, then struct rte_eth_dev_data
dev_link field is where to do it.
As Ferruh was saying, dev_info->speed_capa contains the speed capabilties
of the particular NIC in use, not the driver (detecting firmware version
would be the best here).
marc
>
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also other than that exception, can you please confirm all other
> > devices
> > > support all above speeds?
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > + 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;
> > >
> > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > static const uint32_t *
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-19 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-19 12:05 Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-19 14:36 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-12-19 15:02 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-19 15:05 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-12-19 16:18 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-19 16:35 ` Marc [this message]
2016-12-19 17:58 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-19 16:43 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-12-19 17:59 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-19 18:00 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-20 10:25 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-12-20 10:29 ` Alejandro Lucero
2016-12-20 11:02 ` Alejandro Lucero
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAExC=0SLV7qa5kzS6-UESSYNHq3wqQ3vZrV54btNnMi2kbXhiA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=marcdevel@gmail.com \
--cc=alejandro.lucero@netronome.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).