From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D67CA0C46; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:57:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F254040E3C; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:57:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.189]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906854069B for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:57:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dggeme765-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.54]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4G0Hrl1kQxz6tv6; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 14:53:59 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.69.27.114) by dggeme765-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2176.2; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 14:57:50 +0800 To: Andrew Rybchenko , References: <1618571071-5927-1-git-send-email-tangchengchang@huawei.com> <1619171202-28486-1-git-send-email-tangchengchang@huawei.com> <1619171202-28486-3-git-send-email-tangchengchang@huawei.com> CC: , , , , From: Chengchang Tang Message-ID: <4b1e8435-c25c-b490-c196-9aebdee5733a@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 14:57:50 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.69.27.114] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To dggeme765-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.111) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/bonding: support configuring Tx offloading for bonding X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" On 2021/6/8 17:49, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > "for bonding" is redundant in the summary since it is already > "net/bonding" > > On 4/23/21 12:46 PM, Chengchang Tang wrote: >> Currently, the TX offloading of the bonding device will not take effect by > > TX -> Tx > >> using dev_configure. Because the related configuration will not be >> delivered to the slave devices in this way. > > I think it is a major problem that Tx offloads are actually > ignored. It should be a patches with "Fixes:" which addresses > it. > >> The Tx offloading capability of the bonding device is the intersection of >> the capability of all slave devices. Based on this, the following functions >> are added to the bonding driver: >> 1. If a Tx offloading is within the capability of the bonding device (i.e. >> all the slave devices support this Tx offloading), the enabling status of >> the offloading of all slave devices depends on the configuration of the >> bonding device. >> >> 2. For the Tx offloading that is not within the Tx offloading capability >> of the bonding device, the enabling status of the offloading on the slave >> devices is irrelevant to the bonding device configuration. And it depends >> on the original configuration of the slave devices. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang >> --- >> drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> index 84af348..9922657 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> @@ -1712,6 +1712,8 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev, >> struct rte_flow_error flow_error; >> >> struct bond_dev_private *internals = bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_private; >> + uint64_t tx_offload_cap = internals->tx_offload_capa; >> + uint64_t tx_offload; >> >> /* Stop slave */ >> errval = rte_eth_dev_stop(slave_eth_dev->data->port_id); >> @@ -1759,6 +1761,17 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev, >> slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads &= >> ~DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME; >> >> + while (tx_offload_cap != 0) { >> + tx_offload = 1ULL << __builtin_ctzll(tx_offload_cap); >> + if (bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads & tx_offload) >> + slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads |= >> + tx_offload; >> + else >> + slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads &= >> + ~tx_offload; >> + tx_offload_cap &= ~tx_offload; >> + } >> + > > Frankly speaking I don't understand why it is that complicated. > ethdev rejects of unsupported Tx offloads. So, can't we simply: > slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads = > bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads; > Using such a complicated method is to increase the flexibility of the slave devices, allowing the Tx offloading of the slave devices to be incompletely consistent with the bond device. If some offloading can be turned on without bond device awareness, they can be retained in this case. > > . >