From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888EC1B462 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 08:59:22 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Nov 2018 23:59:21 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,268,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="110647658" Received: from fmsmsx106.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.204]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Nov 2018 23:59:21 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx101.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.199) by FMSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 23:59:20 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx155.gar.corp.intel.com (10.224.48.102) by fmsmsx101.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 23:59:20 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.234]) by BGSMSX155.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.12.149]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 13:26:49 +0530 From: "Varghese, Vipin" To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Yang, Qiming" , "Li, Xiaoyun" , "Wu, Jingjing" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/19] net/ice: support device initialization Thread-Index: AQHUgvki3YcBhEmMsEqUdE3fb9WGSqVc/GAQ Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 07:56:47 +0000 Message-ID: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C1870@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> References: <1542956179-80951-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <1542956179-80951-3-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1542956179-80951-3-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZTZjNWIwNGYtNWQ2YS00N2EyLWI3OTgtOTRlZTg1YTA2M2QxIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiSjk4XC9rZHBZeVNhckpFeTdFWm9WTFRLeHBVSFJQZGwxKzdsQzZmaTNKUm5rVVUyRUVwbkhvR2kwanRONGNLQk0ifQ== dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.400.15 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.223.10.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/19] net/ice: support device initialization 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: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 07:59:23 -0000 Hi Wenzhuo, > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/19] net/ice: support device initialization >=20 > Signed-off-by: Wenzhuo Lu > Signed-off-by: Qiming Yang > Signed-off-by: Xiaoyun Li > Signed-off-by: Jingjing Wu > --- > +static int > +ice_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > +{ > + struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev; > + struct ice_hw *hw =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data- > >dev_private); > + struct ice_pf *pf =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_PF(dev->data->dev_private); > + int ret; > + > + dev->dev_ops =3D &ice_eth_dev_ops; > + > + pci_dev =3D RTE_DEV_TO_PCI(dev->device); > + > + rte_eth_copy_pci_info(dev, pci_dev); > + pf->adapter =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_ADAPTER(dev->data- > >dev_private); > + pf->adapter->eth_dev =3D dev; > + pf->dev_data =3D dev->data; > + hw->back =3D pf->adapter; > + hw->hw_addr =3D (uint8_t *)pci_dev->mem_resource[0].addr; > + hw->vendor_id =3D pci_dev->id.vendor_id; > + hw->device_id =3D pci_dev->id.device_id; > + hw->subsystem_vendor_id =3D pci_dev->id.subsystem_vendor_id; > + hw->subsystem_device_id =3D pci_dev->id.subsystem_device_id; > + hw->bus.device =3D pci_dev->addr.devid; > + hw->bus.func =3D pci_dev->addr.function; > + > + ice_init_controlq_parameter(hw); > + Do we check if process is secondary and ICE PMD is already is initialized? = If we do not check will we run to multi process reinitilization? > + ret =3D ice_init_hw(hw); > + if (ret) { > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to initialize HW"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO, "FW %d.%d.%05d API %d.%d", > + hw->fw_maj_ver, hw->fw_min_ver, hw->fw_build, > + hw->api_maj_ver, hw->api_min_ver); > + > + ice_pf_sw_init(dev); > + ret =3D ice_init_mac_address(dev); > + if (ret) { > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to initialize mac address"); > + goto err_init_mac; > + } Assuming in secondary multi process this will be skipped if primary has alr= eady initialized. Is this understanding correct? > + > + ret =3D ice_res_pool_init(&pf->msix_pool, 1, > + hw- > >func_caps.common_cap.num_msix_vectors - 1); > + if (ret) { > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to init MSIX pool"); > + goto err_msix_pool_init; > + } > + > + ret =3D ice_pf_setup(pf); > + if (ret) { > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to setup PF"); > + goto err_pf_setup; > + } Pool init and pf setup also for secondary skip if primary is done? > + > + return 0; > + > +err_pf_setup: > + ice_res_pool_destroy(&pf->msix_pool); > +err_msix_pool_init: > + rte_free(dev->data->mac_addrs); > +err_init_mac: > + ice_sched_cleanup_all(hw); > + rte_free(hw->port_info); > + ice_shutdown_all_ctrlq(hw); > + > + return ret; > +} > + > +static int > +ice_release_vsi(struct ice_vsi *vsi) > +{ > + struct ice_hw *hw; > + struct ice_vsi_ctx vsi_ctx; > + enum ice_status ret; > + > + if (!vsi) > + return 0; Should we check if process is secondary and primary sees the port, then ski= p the destroy? > + > + hw =3D ICE_VSI_TO_HW(vsi); > + > + memset(&vsi_ctx, 0, sizeof(vsi_ctx)); > + > + vsi_ctx.vsi_num =3D vsi->vsi_id; > + vsi_ctx.info =3D vsi->info; > + ret =3D ice_free_vsi(hw, vsi->idx, &vsi_ctx, false, NULL); > + if (ret !=3D ICE_SUCCESS) { > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to free vsi by aq, %u", vsi->vsi_id); > + rte_free(vsi); > + return -1; > + } > + > + rte_free(vsi); > + return 0; > +} > + > +static int > +ice_dev_uninit(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) { > + struct ice_hw *hw =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data- > >dev_private); > + struct ice_pf *pf =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_PF(dev->data->dev_private); > + > + if (rte_eal_process_type() =3D=3D RTE_PROC_SECONDARY) > + return 0; > + Here we have check for secondary, but if the port is added in secondary and= not primary is it valid to return 0? > + ice_dev_close(dev); > + > + dev->dev_ops =3D NULL; > + dev->rx_pkt_burst =3D NULL; > + dev->tx_pkt_burst =3D NULL; > + > + rte_free(dev->data->mac_addrs); > + dev->data->mac_addrs =3D NULL; > + > + ice_release_vsi(pf->main_vsi); > + ice_sched_cleanup_all(hw); > + rte_free(hw->port_info); > + ice_shutdown_all_ctrlq(hw); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static void > +ice_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > +{ > + struct ice_pf *pf =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_PF(dev->data->dev_private); > + struct ice_hw *hw =3D ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data- > >dev_private); > + > + if (rte_eal_process_type() =3D=3D RTE_PROC_SECONDARY) > + return; > + Same as previous comment, if port is started in secondary it will not be se= en in primary. Hence is it right to return 0 without checking? > + ice_res_pool_destroy(&pf->msix_pool); > + ice_release_vsi(pf->main_vsi); > + > + ice_shutdown_all_ctrlq(hw); > +}