From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7011B483 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 23:23:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C09020DC2; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:23:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 06 Feb 2019 17:23:10 -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=NMSIpYC/MMi1GZ1HahtdjEX/LyzIMW91zpkpOYIMLfo=; b=Ztem6lx1mS3T qugV0TZhKkrTZnZCj/8bjf6UuGSg1jOJ+WiBOHM2+5f0mzhv7+rL6T6WDFaN6jYs M5h7yKM/fW9cThrNDcV8mDbdmCvnbEL+ZVz2n4aSrwam3vRzgFfT+tzjostNyahD yAGuPQqrs2otCUbk7z6y2wBCNRo/d9Q= 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=NMSIpYC/MMi1GZ1HahtdjEX/LyzIMW91zpkpOYIML fo=; b=yd43KNVztCmI6L2Qmw5lii62ie26eNnPeITL6nLd1UhLeEmx/4iIJZImo 3zJUpQmlimc3n+/nSh5XGMGcnk6WOIXf5HKthaVQTe6J7iG22qhrKsUf4RY3qc4k 69FlxPBalNkH4N+0G4EYrONJVm2PeMAsUd4OBPTnsJwcsSJF7HVi6wJtn4M3xZb2 PB9QZD2i9gkkZkkKYujHUajkTTXnAu9+povPV1UWgTGZRvC9JUHw6QGcEtz0AZr9 MOavQ1VBt/if/j8aBUKxZXlr7svViG8hIRcGhVzA9oYrEXBgHp6bww1e/xFvdl4T kBGcMIn0BJkc2s3gLmj0P3Yov+OQQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrkeekgdduieegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf 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 EA385E4366; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:23:08 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Matan Azrad , Shahaf Shuler , Yongseok Koh , dev@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 23:23:07 +0100 Message-ID: <1561267.IqWJBFvPPj@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190206141648.5f2d6a99@hermes.lan> References: <20190206215909.30147-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20190206141648.5f2d6a99@hermes.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx: support firmware version query 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: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 22:23:10 -0000 06/02/2019 23:16, Stephen Hemminger: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 22:59:09 +0100 > Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > The API function rte_eth_dev_fw_version_get() is querying drivers > > via the operation callback fw_version_get(). > > The implementation of this operation is added for mlx4 and mlx5. > > Both functions are copying the same ibverbs field fw_ver > > which is retrieved when calling ibv_query_device[_ex]() > > during the port probing. > > > > It is tested with command "drvinfo" of examples/ethtool/. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > Looks good, but hard to test because: > * testpmd doesn't report it Yes, good idea, we should do this query somewhere in testpmd. Can be a separate command or part of some other infos. > * with netvsc (and failsafe) the device is owned and not visible > > Fixing testpmd is not hard, but what is best way to handle > the nested device situation. I am not sure we want to expose such info via failsafe or bonding. If we are interested to know the underlying hardware, we should access directly to the nested device.