From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 126031B130 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 19:54:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A563F280F9; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 13:54:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 14 Jan 2019 13:54:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=F4QU/XARu+nqqEz0u7JEPdYl/jTnLeEZv5KVjWeHIDY=; b=QC0TXAuTSeLk rD462MObL6BdcmqyZb0o3ZgdGVFyD29mMHCSjpCY0NCOa5FZAoqfUlxfwgIA2TxU A4IaQU0NblnUZQooVH3IidSoXcIjIZeJVWM+4gkmyCNm9PEbSb5uTspZoTGM3uiV 68/72sSkG+oqrKs7EnXrz1cPrB3+t+Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=F4QU/XARu+nqqEz0u7JEPdYl/jTnLeEZv5KVjWeHI DY=; b=q7tgMAuFGTZB22m7iCXupPkjX2IPWvbkFqZQ/OctG6o/6lYdviJ3CZ+yA IZB16Tj9P6KcZPL10lQflLvGdFBdKsoxaDOdkR1BXs393flyNSZ36rAlZO6Fk9wR G6zqvDo7xSgaU7IyK3/NHVyKGCMXtU1p+UIXEwE611nzAp+TgfEmpCg/esBpiIFq 3fauY8ZoO2AQ0gg0ZfXeoYaZU5obYKqfD980YbZJbV8MnuUshvpBypWmWlc7Yr64 ZPIdUX6I0p9OE9HHL7WKDS4SgxJZSQYDg+h2adnObTIAix1XbNrNosl2ctE7ik0o G2QZ9v0+tJAdI1taS01LU5j2/9ieg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrgedugdduudehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffkjg hfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcu oehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtd efrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 60BD010281; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 13:54:56 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Alejandro Lucero Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 19:54:54 +0100 Message-ID: <11471688.z4v4DX61lF@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190111132553.10683-1-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> <2981184f-f2ef-b475-53af-e530a9551e60@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/nfp: add CPP bridge as service 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: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:54:58 -0000 14/01/2019 19:29, Alejandro Lucero: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:22 PM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > On 1/14/2019 6:00 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:40 AM Ferruh Yigit > > > wrote: > > > > > > On 1/13/2019 9:41 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 11/01/2019 17:42, Ferruh Yigit: > > > >> On 1/11/2019 1:25 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > > >>> The Netronome's Network Flow Processor chip is highly > > programmable > > > >>> with the goal of processing packets at high speed. Processing > > units > > > >>> and other chip components are available from the host through the > > > >>> PCIe CPP(Command Push Pull bus) interface. The NFP PF PMD > > configures > > > >>> a CPP handler for setting up and working with vNICs, perform > > actions > > > >>> like link up or down, or accessing extended stats from the MAC > > component. > > > >>> > > > >>> There exist NFP host tools which access the NFP components for > > > >>> programming and debugging but they require the CPP interface. > > When the > > > >>> PMD is bound to the PF, the DPDK app owns the CPP interface, so > > these > > > >>> host tools can not access the NFP through other means like NFP > > kernel > > > >>> drivers. > > > >>> > > > >>> This patch adds a CPP bridge using the rte_service API which can > > be > > > >>> enabled by a DPDK app. Interestingly, DPDK clients like OVS will > > not > > > >>> enable specific service cores, but this can be performed with a > > > >>> secondary process specifically enabling this CPP bridge service > > and > > > >>> therefore giving access to the NFP to those host tools. > > > >>> > > > >>> v2: > > > >>> - Avoid printfs for debugging > > > >>> - fix compilation problems for powerpc > > > >>> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero > > > > > > >> > > > >> Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks. > > > > > > > > It does not compile with 32-bit toolchain. > > > > > > > > Please check the occurences of %lu, thanks. > > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > We aware the build error, but let it because nfp doesn't support > > 32-bit. > > > > > > But I just recognized that it is enabled by default on 32-bit > > default configs, > > > we should disable them. > > > > > > > > > Hi Alejandro, > > > > > > Can you please disable nfp driver explicitly on > > > 'defconfig_i686-native-linuxapp-*' config files, perhaps also on > > > 'defconfig_x86_x32-native-linuxapp-gcc' too? > > > > > > I will drop the existing patch from next-net. > > > > > > > > > Ok. I'll do asap. > > > > > > > > > And if it is possible to fix the build error, specially if it is > > just for %lu of > > > the logging, I prefer the fix against the config update, but it is > > up to you. > > > > > > > > > I did not see any logging error/warning when compiling nor any when using > > > checkpatch. I have used a gcc 7.3.1 (Ubuntu) and a 8.2.1 (RH). What are > > you > > > using for triggering such error? > > > > Using 'i686-native-linuxapp-gcc' config, which is for 32-bit, gives > > following > > build error [1] with this patch. > > > > > OK. But after the patch I have just sent for removing NFP PMD from 32 bits > builds, nothing is really needed then. Right? > > If so, should I send the patch again about the CPP bridge or you can redo > it? I will re-apply it on master.