From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583C98E8D
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 12:11:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f206so208032227wmf.0
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 03:11:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to;
bh=XjBStlI6dsOqUQ1ALQoHyjXlfEF223Ag0mtIIN3z6b8=;
b=klzZHTgoAF8ltj+o6qS80UOaGxj3ql/mZlWFBl6Ncz+n9af79xtME/u8WWKI/4aWWD
N4nc169j0LA1DAVA8VBkuR5y0Px/DD6b/moJ0XJJVVeUsdk2uDz9Fp8RlLVDDteiaM+y
lXlFfyarZKfyBuNewMXPPHRC+UukcdSYt5obkBD3rsVUesl2HxOI0njbkObLjynw6SO9
dvYon5q6Jto8xr9BC74eIM0R6X+M58wITCMTdiVkAVQhnYE7G3w7LOypvbUzvmDS5c2r
OXKpRSrXdrilMuAYB5WdcLBZu9YQybcXDCKUBGC6l1HHukktqcfUKjAuS+T6WfhjFXEr
aRNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id
:mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-type
:content-disposition:in-reply-to;
bh=XjBStlI6dsOqUQ1ALQoHyjXlfEF223Ag0mtIIN3z6b8=;
b=LjUlpoUK9lxD9sBovRx2f4Ty0s/G3L8T8q4m63OAKfd9w9d8eQsu7wBX5Fd+mJdSUe
DCjkiG2NKG8B0CwIVQ0KThZztlNb+BYg0HB5r2+trlIAlzyYQyThyOh3PHhl2N0Vfaxw
WFzG+vk+rS7Q92qDK3dG+wRj+P+w/pF5aByHdrx87cjx4SgzFbYdKL1SfU2Gn+uFhXyv
OWjYJu6B4jkZcfUET9TkKfWtMYkmAk2k8frqau2+H11NVy9uRhu+WOYED78vqyLFINuJ
p5THbVVgTX2dqg8An8GjAFHITW6klnnBNYZh4Tm0kEFCFi3h/CEeVJEDRMdZRqc5ChYs
Lq2Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnqBHVh4j4eE3BfXuaPoqmq4MpKo3S5l8nYIOI07pegg46rVku43MkfLpmiAdArHNAqAe3GC0h9mseE1fjUH/KAYVl/eg==
X-Received: by 10.28.127.87 with SMTP id a84mr78697212wmd.83.1451905893136;
Mon, 04 Jan 2016 03:11:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 6wind.com (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net.
[82.239.227.177])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u69sm44025121wmu.20.2016.01.04.03.11.31
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Mon, 04 Jan 2016 03:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 12:11:14 +0100
From: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
To: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20160104111114.GS3806@6wind.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
References: <1451544799-70776-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
<1451544799-70776-9-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1451544799-70776-9-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 08/12] pmd/mlx4: add dev_ptype_info_get
implementation
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:11:33 -0000
Hi Jianfeng,
I'm only commenting the mlx4/mlx5 bits in this message, see below.
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 02:53:15PM +0800, Jianfeng Tan wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c b/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c
> index 207bfe2..85afa32 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c
> @@ -2836,6 +2836,8 @@ rxq_cleanup(struct rxq *rxq)
> * @param flags
> * RX completion flags returned by poll_length_flags().
> *
> + * @note: fix mlx4_dev_ptype_info_get() if any change here.
> + *
> * @return
> * Packet type for struct rte_mbuf.
> */
> @@ -4268,6 +4270,30 @@ mlx4_dev_infos_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct rte_eth_dev_info *info)
> priv_unlock(priv);
> }
>
> +static int
> +mlx4_dev_ptype_info_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint32_t ptype_mask,
> + uint32_t ptypes[])
> +{
> + int num = 0;
> +
> + if ((dev->rx_pkt_burst == mlx4_rx_burst)
> + || (dev->rx_pkt_burst == mlx4_rx_burst_sp)) {
> + /* refers to rxq_cq_to_pkt_type() */
> + if ((ptype_mask & RTE_PTYPE_L3_MASK) == RTE_PTYPE_L3_MASK) {
> + ptypes[num++] = RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4;
> + ptypes[num++] = RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6;
> + }
> +
> + if ((ptype_mask & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_MASK) == RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_MASK) {
> + ptypes[num++] = RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4;
> + ptypes[num++] = RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6;
> + }
> + } else
> + num = -ENOTSUP;
> +
> + return num;
> +}
I think checking for mlx4_rx_burst and mlx4_rx_burst_sp is unnecessary at
the moment, all RX burst functions do update the packet_type field, no need
for extra complexity.
Same comment for mlx5.
> +
> /**
> * DPDK callback to get device statistics.
> *
> @@ -4989,6 +5015,7 @@ static const struct eth_dev_ops mlx4_dev_ops = {
> .stats_reset = mlx4_stats_reset,
> .queue_stats_mapping_set = NULL,
> .dev_infos_get = mlx4_dev_infos_get,
> + .dev_ptypes_info_get = mlx4_dev_ptype_info_get,
> .vlan_filter_set = mlx4_vlan_filter_set,
> .vlan_tpid_set = NULL,
> .vlan_strip_queue_set = NULL,
> --
> 2.1.4
>
--
Adrien Mazarguil
6WIND