From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F9D91B493 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 06:16:41 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Dec 2018 21:16:40 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,347,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="98375064" Received: from fmsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.201]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Dec 2018 21:16:40 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx117.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.17) by FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 21:16:39 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx153.gar.corp.intel.com (10.224.23.4) by fmsmsx117.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 21:16:39 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.20]) by BGSMSX153.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.9]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 10:46:36 +0530 From: "Varghese, Vipin" To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Zhang, Helin" , "Xu, Qian Q" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device initialization Thread-Index: AQHUitZGtxdD52Cel0muTmHuUQSTKaVt/qlggALQ4wCAAGNvwP//sKyAgABg6jD//61YgIAAB3AAgAADfYCAAADRgIAAANKAgAsxzvA= Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 05:16:35 +0000 Message-ID: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2DA505@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> References: <1542956179-80951-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <1543820821-108122-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <1543820821-108122-3-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C452C@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE1167A@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2D4187@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE117B9@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2D42DE@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE1183B@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532FA732@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE11879@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532FA76F@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE1188F@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093FE1188F@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.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: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNmNlMjg2ZDktZWM2Ni00NTBhLWI4OGUtMzljZTEyZDI2M2UwIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiRUs0NW10bkJvUGFpV2lnQ2RjZ0RIa2pBUHd0dnllR1NjQXBxZk1wcnl1RjQrOXg4bzBrVW0ySWtBS3pGdGhpTyJ9 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 v2 02/20] 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: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 05:16:41 -0000 Adding to mailing list for the last update > -----Original Message----- > From: Lu, Wenzhuo > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 1:19 PM > To: Zhang, Qi Z ; Varghese, Vipin > > Cc: Yigit, Ferruh ; Zhang, Helin > ; Xu, Qian Q > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device initiali= zation >=20 > Yes, after discussing with colleagues, I think this feature is not well d= esigned and > implemented. Will remove it from this release. >=20 >=20 > Best regards > Wenzhuo Lu >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Zhang, Qi Z > > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 3:46 PM > > To: Lu, Wenzhuo ; Varghese, Vipin > > > > Cc: Yigit, Ferruh ; Zhang, Helin > > ; Xu, Qian Q > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device > > initialization > > > > Yes, I saw that, so there is no gap for this, we can simply set this > > feature to N in our current release. > > > > Thanks > > Qi > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Lu, Wenzhuo > > > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 3:43 PM > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z ; Varghese, Vipin > > > > > > Cc: Yigit, Ferruh ; Zhang, Helin > > > ; Xu, Qian Q > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device > > > initialization > > > > > > Hi Qi, > > > I think we have "secondary support", it's named as " Multiprocess > > > aware". We can omit that. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Wenzhuo Lu > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Zhang, Qi Z > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 3:31 PM > > > > To: Varghese, Vipin > > > > Cc: Yigit, Ferruh ; Lu, Wenzhuo > > > > ; Zhang, Helin ; Xu, > > > > Qian Q > > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device > > > > initialization > > > > > > > > Hi Vipin: > > > > > > > > I saw you observed the missing feature description of CPK > > > > document, from my view it's not a CPK specific issue, but a > > > > generic issue as missing item in exist nic feature list. > > > > I'm thinking if you could summarize all the gap from DTS view and > > > > raise a Jira case to DPDK team, so we can add this to future > > > > development plan. > > > > > > > > So far what I captured is > > > > 1. tx loopback > > > > 2. secondary support > > > > > > > > What do you think about it? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Qi > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Lu, Wenzhuo > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 3:04 PM > > > > > To: Varghese, Vipin ; dev@dpdk.org > > > > > Cc: Yang, Qiming ; Li, Xiaoyun > > > > > ; Wu, Jingjing > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support device > > > > > initialization > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vipin, > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Varghese, Vipin > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 2:31 PM > > > > > > To: Lu, Wenzhuo ; dev@dpdk.org > > > > > > Cc: Yang, Qiming ; Li, Xiaoyun > > > > > > ; Wu, Jingjing > > > > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 02/20] net/ice: support > > > > > > device initialization > > > > > > > > > > > > snipped > > > > > > > > > > > + ice_init_controlq_parameter(hw); > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > + ret =3D ice_init_hw(hw); > > > > > > > > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > > > > > > > > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to initialize > > HW"); > > > > > > > > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Definition for ice_init_hw in patch 01/20 does not > > > > > > > > > > check for > > > > > > > > > > primary- secondary. Are we allowing secondary to > > > > > > > > > > invoke ice_init_hw if it is initialized by primary? > > > > > > > > > It's a patch split issue. We add the check in later patch= . > > > > > > > > > Will put it in this patch in the new version. > > > > > > > > Suggestion in current patch if comment is kept it will be > > > > > > > > easier to understand that it is taken care in future patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Example patch 2/20 has comment stating adding support in > > > > > > > > patch > > > > 5/20. > > > > > > > > Then in patch 5/20 it removes the ToDo it is easier to > > > > > > > > read and understand the flow > > > > > > > I mean I made a mistake that put the check code in a later pa= tch. > > > > > > > Actually this code should be put in this patch. I plan to cor= rect it. > > > > > > > But currently I think we're running out of time. I prefer > > > > > > > not supporting multi process in this release. > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying the same. It will helpful to add 'to do > > > > > > or future items' in cover letter, code comment and release > > > > > > documents which helps reviewers, early adopters and later > > maintainers. > > > > > I'd like to suggest focusing on what we have. Sorry, for many > > > > > reasons it's not appropriate to talk too much about we'll do in > > > > > the > > future. > > > > > Like Internally we have a plan, but it keeps changing. Like > > > > > something is still > > > > under investigation... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > + 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); > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Snipped > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > +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); > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > + ICE_PROC_SECONDARY_CHECK_RET_0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should not we check if primary is alive and NIC is > > > > > > > > > > used or initialized by primary then ' > > > > ICE_PROC_SECONDARY_CHECK_RET_0'? > > > > > > > > > I think it's not a critical issue if the process is > > > > > > > > > terminate abnormally without > > > > > > > > uninit. > > > > > > > > > Comparing with that, I have more concern about this > > > > > > > > > scenario, if the primary process exit and uninit the > > > > > > > > > resource, the secondary process is left > > > > > > > > alone. > > > > > > > > Since primary is application which reserves the huge page > > > > > > > > memory (malloc, zmalloc, memzone). So when secondary is > > > > > > > > killed or stop whole huge pages are released. I am bit > > > > > > > > confused what is check > > > > > > suggested affecting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And also > > > > > > > > > to me it looks not a good solution to change every PMD > > > > > > > > > for this > > > > feature. > > > > > > > > I am not aware about why other PMD are done in specific way= . > > > > > > > > In my humble opinion, if there is a right way let it be > > > > > > > > used rather than doing other way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't > > > > > > > > > see many PMD support it. Maybe we'd better not support > > > > > > > > > it now and wait for a better whole picture. > > > > > > > > I wait for others to comment to this approach. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > snipped