From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E2CA052A;
	Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:34:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F640140DD7;
	Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:34:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60520140D68
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:34:53 +0100 (CET)
IronPort-SDR: icsKlJrgw7ppDBKNSbsKCgyr7pozn4EXIfoMCFX3G2fDkAOVCjGrDNG5DFNSw7UFoWKJ7Qeo5P
 470sJ+62YkmA==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9876"; a="180154628"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,379,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="180154628"
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
 by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 27 Jan 2021 06:34:52 -0800
IronPort-SDR: DRx40g61dsfZwkfI2KYT3m+VCzLL1DA86U0jksKf7P08OS6yti0hhFCy62xIkcq+zRrERk17O4
 CnmsxWWIGpcw==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,379,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="430117240"
Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.208.215])
 ([10.213.208.215])
 by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 27 Jan 2021 06:34:51 -0800
To: Liron Himi <lironh@marvell.com>,
 Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
References: <20201202101212.4717-1-lironh@marvell.com>
 <20210122191925.24308-1-lironh@marvell.com>
 <20210122191925.24308-27-lironh@marvell.com>
 <78541fad-ec6d-401a-37c8-45df28e942b0@intel.com>
 <DM5PR18MB2214262AE79F14DE24275B05C6BB9@DM5PR18MB2214.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Message-ID: <6200e955-7a00-651a-2389-ad3756a8290a@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 14:34:47 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR18MB2214262AE79F14DE24275B05C6BB9@DM5PR18MB2214.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 26/37] net/mvpp2: introduce
 fixup for fifo overrun
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 1/27/2021 2:08 PM, Liron Himi wrote:
> 
> 
> Liron Himi
> Staff Software Engineer
> 
>   
> 
> Park Azorim, Kyriat Arie, Petah Tikva, 49527, Israel
> Mobile: +972.52.3329169
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 27 January 2021 01:50
> To: Liron Himi <lironh@marvell.com>; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 26/37] net/mvpp2: introduce fixup for fifo overrun
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 1/22/2021 7:19 PM, lironh@marvell.com wrote:
>> From: Liron Himi <lironh@marvell.com>
>>
>> Currently the HW is configured with only one pool which its buffer
>> size may be larger than the rx-fifo-size.
>> In that situation, frame size larger than the fifo-size is gets
>> dropped due to fifo overrun.
>> this is cause because the HW works in cut-through mode which waits to
>> have in the fifo at least the amount of bytes as define in the
>> smallest pool's buffer size.
>>
>> This patch add a dummy pool which its buffer size is very small
>> (smaller than 64B frame). this tricks the HW and any frame size is
>> gets passed from the FIFO to the PP2.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liron Himi <lironh@marvell.com>
> 
> so this is fixing the FIFO overrun, can you please provide the fixes line?
> [L.H.] it is kind of combination of HW fifo size (which defined by kernel driver), given buffer size and incoming pkt size. I don't think I can point to a line in DPDK driver code that this patch is fixing.
> it is a kind of WA for a HW issue.
> 

Is HW FIFO size or HW behavior (to wait at least smallest pool's buffer size) 
changed with recent kernel driver or MUSDK to cause this problem? If so can you 
please mention/reference that change in the commit log?

> And should this patch backported?
> [L.H.] it cannot be backported as it depends on MUSDK api change.
> 

Is the fix or problem depends on the MUSDK API change? If the fix has a 
dependency will this be a problem, since it means latest driver won't be usable 
with old MUSDK version?
Can you please clarify the dependency in the commit log?

Thanks,
ferruh