From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4085CA0A02; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 04:54:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D1B40686; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 04:54:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B104067B for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 04:54:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4F6lJF1cBlznZy1; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 11:51:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.78.49.194] (10.78.49.194) by DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 11:53:56 +0800 To: "Li, Xiaoyun" , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" , dev References: <1614939741-63927-1-git-send-email-oulijun@huawei.com> <1614939741-63927-2-git-send-email-oulijun@huawei.com> <2a0bee90-2c74-5f07-aaf0-cba8b94944e8@huawei.com> <918ea8b0-8d5d-ea2b-efce-7995d787b873@huawei.com> From: oulijun Message-ID: <01839804-cf22-56a9-40d8-2798a0dd1130@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 11:53:56 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.78.49.194] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [Linuxarm] Re: [PATCH 1/3] app/testpmd: fix forwarding configuration when DCB test X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" 在 2021/3/25 10:21, Li, Xiaoyun 写道: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: oulijun >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 21:40 >> To: linuxarm@openeuler.org; Li, Xiaoyun ; dev >> >> Subject: Re: [Linuxarm] Re: [PATCH 1/3] app/testpmd: fix forwarding >> configuration when DCB test >> >> >> >> 在 2021/3/24 10:03, Li, Xiaoyun 写道: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: oulijun >>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 22:19 >>>> To: Li, Xiaoyun ; Yigit, Ferruh >>>> >>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] app/testpmd: fix forwarding configuration >>>> when DCB test >>>> >>> >>>>>> @@ -2707,14 +2707,16 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid) >>>>>> portid_t peer_pl[RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS]; >>>>>> int peer_pi; >>>>>> >>>>>> - if (dcb_test) { >>>>>> - dcb_test = 0; >>>>>> - dcb_config = 0; >>>>>> - } >>>>>> - >>>>>> if (port_id_is_invalid(pid, ENABLED_WARN)) >>>>>> return; >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * In "start_port" function, dcb_test is set to 1 based on dcb_config. >>>>>> + * So it should be cleared when dcb_config is 0. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + if (dcb_config == 0) >>>>>> + dcb_test = 0; >>>>>> + >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand why are you changing this. >>>>> dcb_test will only be set when dcb_config is 1 when starting ports. >>>>> And both >>>> dcb_test and dcb_config will be cleared when stopping ports. >>>>> So dcb will only affect when you set port dcb and then start port >>>>> and when >>>> stop port dcb will be cleared. >>>>> >>>> Yes, I think. The forwarding streams should not be changed from >>>> "dcb_fwd_config_setup" to "rss_fwd_config_setup" after dcb info is >> configured. >>>> But, now, the logical codes do it when stopping ports and then starting ports. >>>>> So what's the problem of original codes? >>>>> >>>>> Your change will cause issues that there's no place to set >>>>> dcb_config as 0. If >>>> you config dcb, then it'll be always dcb mode unless restart the whole >> testpmd. >>>>> >>>> As far as I know, the current testpmd only supports switching from >>>> the normal mode to the dcb mode, but does not support the reverse >> operation. >>>> And " dcb_config" is set to 1, and then "dcb_test" is set to 1 after >>>> config. >>> >>> You're not answering my questions. Why are you changing the behavior of >> testpmd? >>> Your change will make testpmd stay dcb mode once set dcb mode and can't go >> back to normal mode. If users want to go back to normal mode, he/she has to >> restart the whole testpmd. >>> >> Yes. Testpmd and PMD driver are both in dcb mode after dcb info is configured. >> In my opinion, the 'dcb_test' flag can't be clear to go back to normal mode after >> stopping port and then starting port. Because PMD driver is still dcb mode. If >> users want to go back it, users should disable dcb mode and enable RSS or other >> mode. >> >>> It worked as you can set dcb mode and start port. After stopping port, if you >> still want dcb mode, you need to set dcb mode command again. But at least the >> old way won't break anything. >>> @Yigit, Ferruh Not sure which behavior is better, what do you think? >>> >>> And @oulijun can you just answer all comments in one thread? >>> >> After stopping port, the 'dcb_test' flag is clear. At this moment, the dcb >> configuration in testpmd has not be changed. users may not understand why >> the DCB mode needs to be reconfigured. > > OK. You're right. There's no place writing port->dcb_flag back to 0. > Yes. Unless testpmd supports switching from DCB mode to other modes. Do you have any other suggestions about this patch set, xiaoyun? >>>>>> printf("Stopping ports...\n"); >>>>>> >>>>>> RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(pi) { >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.7.4 >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linuxarm mailing list -- linuxarm@openeuler.org To unsubscribe send an >>> email to linuxarm-leave@openeuler.org >>>