From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD64DA052A; Fri, 25 Dec 2020 15:06:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D197C9FA; Fri, 25 Dec 2020 15:06:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from stargate.chelsio.com (stargate.chelsio.com [12.32.117.8]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18FD4C9EE for ; Fri, 25 Dec 2020 15:05:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com [10.193.185.94]) by stargate.chelsio.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0BPE5lUi002974; Fri, 25 Dec 2020 06:05:52 -0800 Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 19:19:33 +0530 From: Rahul Lakkireddy To: "Min Hu (Connor)" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, kaara.satwik@chelsio.com Message-ID: <20201225134931.GA5908@chelsio.com> References: <1608504422-29220-1-git-send-email-rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com> <20201223123100.GA1776@chelsio.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20201223123100.GA1776@chelsio.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix start index for showing FEC array 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" +dev@dpdk.org which seems to have been dropped by accident. On Friday, December 12/25/20, 2020 at 09:03:43 +0800, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: > > > 在 2020/12/24 19:25, Rahul Lakkireddy 写道: > >On Thursday, December 12/24/20, 2020 at 17:36:27 +0800, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: > >> > >> > >>在 2020/12/23 20:31, Rahul Lakkireddy 写道: > >>>On Monday, December 12/21/20, 2020 at 17:07:21 +0800, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>在 2020/12/21 6:47, Rahul Lakkireddy 写道: > >>>>>From: Karra Satwik > >>>>> > >>>>>Start from index 0 when going through the FEC array. This will allow > >>>>>"off" to get printed for RTE_ETH_FEC_NOFEC mode. > >>>>> > >>>>>Fixes: b19da32e3151 ("app/testpmd: add FEC command") > >>>>>Cc: stable@dpdk.org > >>>>> > >>>>>Signed-off-by: Karra Satwik > >>>>>Signed-off-by: Rahul Lakkireddy > >>>>>--- > >>>>> app/test-pmd/config.c | 2 +- > >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>>> > >>>>>diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c > >>>>>index 3f6c8642b..a6a5baa4e 100644 > >>>>>--- a/app/test-pmd/config.c > >>>>>+++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c > >>>>>@@ -3701,7 +3701,7 @@ show_fec_capability(unsigned int num, struct rte_eth_fec_capa *speed_fec_capa) > >>>>> printf("%s : ", > >>>>> rte_eth_link_speed_to_str(speed_fec_capa[i].speed)); > >>>>>- for (j = RTE_ETH_FEC_AUTO; j < RTE_DIM(fec_mode_name); j++) { > >>>>>+ for (j = 0; j < RTE_DIM(fec_mode_name); j++) { > >>>> > >>>>As RTE_ETH_FEC_NOFEC is mode which every device has, so we think it > >>>>should not be regarged as "capabilities". > >>>>Thanks. > >>>> > >>> > >>>We had gotten several requests asking if device supported turning > >>>FEC "off" because it was not listed in capabilities. Hence, the > >>>motiviation for this patch to explicitly show that "off" is > >>>supported. > >> > >>HI, we have referred to other netcard in kernel driver mode, it shows like > >>this: > >> > >>[root@centos197-test_dpdk]$ethtool --show-fec eth9 > >>FEC parameters for eth9: > >>Configured FEC encodings: Auto BaseR > >>Active FEC encoding: Off > >> > >>Here, "Configured FEC encodings" means the capability it supports, it > >>does not include "off", although it can be configured using "off". > >>thanks. > >> > > > >It is the same with our own card too using our kernel driver and > >have gotten the same questions in the past with our kernel driver > >too. > > > ># ethtool --show-fec enp2s0f4 > >FEC parameters for enp2s0f4: > >Configured FEC encodings: Auto BaseR RS > >Active FEC encoding: RS > > > >We don't have any strong opinion on this. We just wanted to let > >testpmd show the 'off' caps since it's also an available option. > >If the intention is confusing, then sure we will drop the patch. > >Let us know your feedback. > Hi, I've got your opinion, but I think the display about FEC in dpdk > testpmd had better be in accordance with that in kernel ethtool. > IF the two is different, it may confuse users, thanks. > So, what about everybody? any opinion will be welcome. > > > > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> if (RTE_ETH_FEC_MODE_TO_CAPA(j) & > >>>>> speed_fec_capa[i].capa) > >>>>> printf("%s ", fec_mode_name[j].name); > >>>>> > >>>. > >>> > >. > >