From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from stargate.chelsio.com (stargate.chelsio.com [12.32.117.8]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD3D4C93 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 09:44:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com [10.193.185.94]) by stargate.chelsio.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w2S7iolH019952; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:44:51 -0700 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 13:14:03 +0530 From: Rahul Lakkireddy To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Kumar A S , Nirranjan Kirubaharan , Indranil Choudhury , Shahaf Shuler Message-ID: <20180328074402.GB19600@chelsio.com> References: <20180327070155.GA17402@chelsio.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/13] cxgbe: add CXGBE VF PMD and updates 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, 28 Mar 2018 07:44:55 -0000 On Tuesday, March 03/27/18, 2018 at 22:56:44 +0530, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 3/27/2018 8:01 AM, Rahul Lakkireddy wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 03/27/18, 2018 at 02:21:56 +0530, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > >> On 3/10/2018 10:48 PM, Rahul Lakkireddy wrote: > >>> Patches 1 - 9 add support for cxgbe VF driver. Patches 10 - 12 fix > >>> bugs and convert license in cxgbe files to SPDX License Tag. Patch > >>> 13 adds compile time option to keep outer vlan tag in Q-in-Q packet. > >>> > >>> Patch 1 adds minimal cxgbe VF driver. > >> > >> Can you please update driver documentation with new supported device? > >> > > > > There is no addition of new devices. The existing supported devices will > > be supported for VF PMD as well. > > Sorry I didn't get this part, new PMD is introduced (VF driver) but no new > device support added? If so why new driver is added? > Sorry for the confusion. By mistake, I replied in relation to existing cxgbe PMD. New device ids are already handled by Patch 1/13 for VF. Will get the docs updated. > > > >>> > >>> Patch 2 adds firmware mailbox support for VF. > >>> > >>> Patch 3 adds base functions to enable VF ports in subsequent patches. > >>> > >>> Patch 4 adds cxgbe VF probe to initialize VF devices. > >>> > >>> Patch 5 initializes SGE and queues for VF. > >>> > >>> Patch 6 enables RSS for VF. > >>> > >>> Patch 7 updates TX and RX path for VF. > >>> > >>> Patch 8 adds support for VF port statistics. > >>> > >>> Patch 9 adds support to set mac address. > >>> > >>> Patch 10 fixes bug where the other ports under same PF are not closed > >>> properly. > >>> > >>> Patch 11 exports RSS hash functions in device info and adds check > >>> to prevent configuring unsupported hash functions. > >>> > >>> Patch 12 converts all cxgbe files to use SPDX license tag. > >>> > >>> Patch 13 adds compile time option to keep outer vlan tag in Q-in-Q > >>> packet. > >> > >> We are trying to reduce the config options, is it possible to provide this > >> functionality with a runtime option (devargs) ? > >> > > > > Thank you for pointing to this. It seems like a good option. > > > >> Or there is already an offload option DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_STRIP, I guess this is > >> different (is it?), if so does it make sense to have another offload option to > >> cover your case? > >> > >> > > > > Yes, this is different. Here, its about stripping or preserving > > Outer-VLAN tag from double-vlan in Rx. We have few customers who need > > this for their use-case. So, adding another offload option would also > > help. Let us know which is preferred - either one, devargs OR another > > offload, seems fine. > > As far as I can see this is done by hw configuration, so I would think this is a > kind of offload and tend to add it as another offload flag. cc'ed Shahaf for > comment. > Replied to Shahaf in earlier mail with more details on how Chelsio HW handles double-vlans. > Out of curiosity, if it is OK, what is the use case of keeping outer-VLAN tag > but remove inner-VLAN? > > > > > Thanks, > > Rahul > > >