From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f67.google.com (mail-lf0-f67.google.com [209.85.215.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B42C568E for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:31:12 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lf0-f67.google.com with SMTP id i75so6718863lfb.1 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:31:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Or0IRq3AhB1cj9gAUIpX+8gIBRkP1+XoHNntcbY6h2E=; b=Rj4IWX7pVSo3H7CwWYdxJcObcTuopoOjhu+ctySmYrfze+qhmew6mh59APX+Eao3H9 2r9nAsmDHwMRcpBixLwla8d1xWi1R5X7b7yF4vzXermTcgxMvkmM1onPZYBzgpCSfitk GsrpVdazFJMskg5d/UAnbY2h4OzdlM6ay7f/8Y9rG4OVVOxogafNsZZD/cMvjIxFK8EO bTTCsgDCRvxc+BUPlklvB5laTMgROjfYIJh8AwqZwzn2LMsuszxLJWKJPmRUYYRl5YBe Fo1YphR5sjkULu5z8MoQ+Dheg6fH2VbBfv8eqYpIZ4JsXdqTs7ymcgFjSqOwaTEIQkRO pFgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Or0IRq3AhB1cj9gAUIpX+8gIBRkP1+XoHNntcbY6h2E=; b=UYK9MZfPmdJVkwmzxC5EWhgRejF6I+3W6rOi+r9FLUzwsrx4Idxv7b++HMmjxNZzFO njihOdENK9F8dRh0NS4wLLRKR57sk/5GpM72ycVpnpPpxdFZoe808fR+g5sPCBHLwHW8 Nk7+U/MyKwDdYy7W4ifjz/8tbE9xGolZMn3UEhRjrENXOFL5eYCxz2rerhWqC/G7/itc rA5p9jwcX6TI5MFWYqHRKdcdPsH+5EyMTzG3B6SmgUObVk8zOa8liCuxbbeaCk14hjNL pLc8HArG1gEN5MCChCEPG3ZJ+XgKEFHUcXOlrNmXAi0lk2Rs+0K5HuNCFMwfSNKOpKs/ O3Eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJ+kQVPCCuQS2FRW6U5QtsaF8qHwi8ya2CWqRhR6kKrU8zcjOQaiKk1ahwm9mrdqrLITDu7VGJPSWWT6w== X-Received: by 10.25.152.205 with SMTP id a196mr6659213lfe.85.1458941471681; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:31:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: marc.sune@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.155.196 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:30:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1457992546-32230-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E032113DB@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <3250488.B81B9g3x6N@xps13> From: Marc Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:30:51 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MYzXpiuV6Nq3C6NumLcKA3RRFoY Message-ID: To: "Zhang, Helin" Cc: Thomas Monjalon , "Xu, Qian Q" , "Xing, Beilei" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Glynn, Michael J" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed API refactoring X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 21:31:12 -0000 On 25 March 2016 at 21:41, Marc wrote: > > On 25 March 2016 at 16:07, Zhang, Helin wrote: > >> Hi Thomas >> >> Beilei is investigating that, she will give her findings soon later, and >> possibly a fix after validating that. >> Thanks! >> >> > I will try to reproduce this on my side too with the latest v12. I could > not try latest patchsets, but i40 (XL710) and igb (82540EM) were working = on > my side for previous versions. Which exact NICs were used to test the > patchset for igb? > I am able to reproduce it straight away by applying v12. The problem is testpmd and in general existing applications have the default value of 0 as link_speeds for autoneg. >>From v9 to v10 patchset the values ETH_LINK_SPEED_AUTONEG and ETH_LINK_SPEED_FIXED were flipped. Reverting this makes it work: marc@Beluga:~/personal/dpdk/tools$ git diff diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h index ef2502a..fb247a7 100644 --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h @@ -244,8 +244,8 @@ struct rte_eth_stats { /** * Device supported speeds bitmap flags */ -#define ETH_LINK_SPEED_FIXED (0 << 0) /**< Disable autoneg (fixed speed) */ -#define ETH_LINK_SPEED_AUTONEG (1 << 0) /**< Autonegotiate (all speeds) */ +#define ETH_LINK_SPEED_AUTONEG (0 << 0) /**< Autonegotiate (all speeds) */ +#define ETH_LINK_SPEED_FIXED (1 << 0) /**< Disable autoneg (fixed speed) */ #define ETH_LINK_SPEED_10M_HD (1 << 1) /**< 10 Mbps half-duplex */ #define ETH_LINK_SPEED_10M (1 << 2) /**< 10 Mbps full-duplex */ #define ETH_LINK_SPEED_100M_HD (1 << 3) /**< 100 Mbps half-duplex */ I think having autoneg =3D=3D 0 is better. Do you agree Thomas? With this change my current NIC (I218-LM) is able to initialize: Option: 27 Enter hex bitmask of cores to execute testpmd app on Example: to execute app on cores 0 to 7, enter 0xff bitmask: 0x3 Launching app EAL: Detected lcore 0 as core 0 on socket 0 EAL: Detected lcore 1 as core 0 on socket 0 EAL: Detected lcore 2 as core 1 on socket 0 EAL: Detected lcore 3 as core 1 on socket 0 EAL: Support maximum 128 logical core(s) by configuration. EAL: Detected 4 lcore(s) EAL: Probing VFIO support... EAL: Module /sys/module/vfio_pci not found! error 2 (No such file or directory) EAL: VFIO modules not loaded, skipping VFIO support... EAL: Setting up physically contiguous memory... EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x26800000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33ef800000 (size =3D 0x26800000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x6e00000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e8800000 (size =3D 0x6e00000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x800000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e7e00000 (size =3D 0x800000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x4400000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e3800000 (size =3D 0x4400000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0xe00000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e2800000 (size =3D 0xe00000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x600000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e2000000 (size =3D 0x600000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f33e1c00000 (size =3D 0x200000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x43600000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f339e400000 (size =3D 0x43600000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x8e00000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f3395400000 (size =3D 0x8e00000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f3395000000 (size =3D 0x200000) EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7f3394c00000 (size =3D 0x200000) EAL: Requesting 1024 pages of size 2MB from socket 0 EAL: TSC frequency is ~2593996 KHz EAL: Master lcore 0 is ready (tid=3D180078c0;cpuset=3D[0]) EAL: lcore 1 is ready (tid=3D94bff700;cpuset=3D[1]) EAL: PCI device 0000:00:19.0 on NUMA socket -1 EAL: probe driver: 8086:15a2 rte_em_pmd EAL: PCI memory mapped at 0x7f3416000000 EAL: PCI memory mapped at 0x7f3416020000 PMD: eth_em_dev_init(): port_id 0 vendorID=3D0x8086 deviceID=3D0x15a2 Interactive-mode selected Configuring Port 0 (socket 0) PMD: eth_em_tx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=3D0x7f33e210efc0 hw_ring=3D0x7f33e211= 10c0 dma_addr=3D0x745110c0 PMD: eth_em_rx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=3D0x7f33e20fea80 hw_ring=3D0x7f33e20f= ef80 dma_addr=3D0x744fef80 PMD: eth_em_start(): << I am troubleshooting link status reporting, which seems not correct with l2fwd. I will also double check that fixed speed and autoneg with subset of speeds work. @Thomas: once I've fixed this shall I submit v13 or should we wait for more feedback from the rest of untested NICs? This patchset needs to be tested by all drivers, at least. marc > Marc > > >> Regards, >> Helin >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] >> > Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 5:36 PM >> > To: Xu, Qian Q >> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Marc ; Ananyev, Konstantin >> > ; Lu, Wenzhuo ; >> > Zhang, Helin ; Richardson, Bruce >> > ; Glynn, Michael J < >> michael.j.glynn@intel.com> >> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed AP= I >> > refactoring >> > >> > Is there someone investigating the issue? >> > I think it should be simple to fix for someone mastering these Intel >> drivers. >> > >> > 2016-03-25 01:02, Xu, Qian Q: >> > > Marc >> > > #Test1 is just a simple test. Just launch testpmd with these nic por= t. >> > > ./testpmd =E2=80=93c 0x3 =E2=80=93n 4 -- -i >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Qian >> > > >> > > From: marc.sune@gmail.com [mailto:marc.sune@gmail.com] On Behalf Of >> > > Marc >> > > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 3:48 PM >> > > To: Xu, Qian Q >> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; Ananyev, Konstantin; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; >> > > Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org >> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed >> > > API refactoring >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On 24 March 2016 at 07:21, Xu, Qian Q >> > > wrote: >> > > Marc >> > > I didn=E2=80=99t quite get your points, I observed that after applyi= ng this >> patchset, all >> > intel nic can=E2=80=99t be started, maybe something wrong happened whe= n you >> check >> > the duplex/autoneg value for different NICs. If we want to merge the >> patchset in >> > RC2, we need fix them. Maybe not an easy job in several days. >> > > >> > > Is this test#1 one of the tests contained in the DPDK repository or >> is it an >> > internal test? >> > > >> > > Marc >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Qian >> > > >> > > From: marc.sune@gmail.com >> > > [mailto:marc.sune@gmail.com] On Behalf O= f >> > > Marc >> > > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 4:54 AM >> > > To: Xu, Qian Q >> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; Ananyev, Konstantin; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; >> > > Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org >> > > >> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed >> > > API refactoring >> > > >> > > Qian, >> > > >> > > On 23 March 2016 at 02:18, Xu, Qian Q >> > > wrote: >> > > We have tested with intel nic and found port can't be started for al= l >> > nics:ixgbe/i40e/igb/bonding, see attached mail for more details. Pleas= e >> check >> > and fix it. >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Qian >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] >> > > On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon >> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 3:59 AM >> > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin >> > > Cc: marcdevel@gmail.com; Richardson, >> > > Bruce; dev@dpdk.org >> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed >> > > API refactoring >> > > >> > > 2016-03-17 19:08, Thomas Monjalon: >> > > > There are still too few tests and reviews, especially for >> > > > autonegotiation with Intel devices (patch #6). >> > > > I would not be surprised to see some bugs in this rework. >> > > >> > > Any feedback about autoneg in e1000/ixgbe/i40e? >> > > Has it been tested before its integration in RC2? >> > > >> > > > The capabilities must be adapted per device. It can be improved in= a >> > > > separate patch. >> > > > >> > > > It will be integrated in 16.04-rc2. >> > > > Please test and review shortly, thanks! >> > > >> > > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> > > From: "Xu, Qian Q" > >> > > To: "Cao, Waterman" >> > > >, "Glynn, >> > > Michael J" >> > > > >> > > Cc: "Richardson, Bruce" >> > > >, >> "Zhu, >> > > Heqing" >, >> > > "O'Driscoll, Tim" >> > > >, "Mcnamara= , >> > > John" >, "Xu= , >> > > HuilongX" >, "Fu= , >> > > JingguoX" >, "Xu= , >> > > Qian Q" >, "Zhang, >> > > Helin" > >> > > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 06:41:37 +0000 >> > > Subject: RE: DPDK link speed with Intel devices Hi, all We have work= ed >> > > out the basic test cases for the patchset. >> > > 1. Test the link speed on major Intel NICs to see if the speed is >> right. >> > > 2. Test the auto-negoation on major Intel NICs to ensure it's workin= g. >> > > Nic covered: ixgbe, igb, i40e, fm10k, bonding(SW), virtio(SW) >> > > >> > > When we run the Test#1 for all major NICs. We found that all these >> NIC port(igb, >> > ixgbe, i40e, fm10k) can't be started. Pls check, if the patch is >> applied, all INTEL >> > port can't be start, terrible things! >> > > >> > > Interactive-mode selected >> > > Configuring Port 0 (socket 0) >> > > PMD: ixgbe_dev_tx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=3D0x7f13e99e3440 >> > > hw_ring=3D0x7f13e99e5480 dma_addr=3D0x8299e5480 >> > > PMD: ixgbe_set_tx_function(): Using simple tx code path >> > > PMD: ixgbe_set_tx_function(): Vector tx enabled. >> > > PMD: ixgbe_dev_rx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=3D0x7f13ffcb8080 >> > > sw_sc_ring=3D0x7f13ffcbaac0 hw_ring=3D0x7f13e99d3380 dma_addr=3D0x82= 99d3380 >> > > PMD: ixgbe_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 0; >> > > autonegotiation disabled Fail to start port 0 Configuring Port 1 >> > > (socket 0) >> > > PMD: i40e_set_tx_function_flag(): Vector tx can be enabled on this >> txq. >> > > PMD: i40e_dev_rx_queue_setup(): Rx Burst Bulk Alloc Preconditions ar= e >> > satisfied. Rx Burst Bulk Alloc function will be used on port=3D1, queu= e=3D0. >> > > PMD: i40e_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 1; autonegotiati= on >> > > disabled >> > > >> > > >> > > Just to double-check; is the test#1 adapted to the _new_ API that >> ethdev has >> > to set link speeds? For the output it seems autoneg is disabled =3D> >> fixed speed, >> > hence the new bitmaps have to be used. >> > > >> > > (I am not claiming patchset is bug free; there might be issues still= ) >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > marc >> > > >> > > Fail to start port 1 >> > > Please stop the ports first >> > > Done >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Qian >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Cao, Waterman >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 11:06 AM >> > > To: Glynn, Michael J >> > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce; Zhu, Heqing; O'Driscoll, Tim; Mcnamara, John; >> > > Xu, Qian Q; Cao, Waterman >> > > Subject: RE: DPDK link speed with Intel devices >> > > >> > > Hi Mike, >> > > >> > > We just knew this patch set last week. >> > > Since this patch set is required to test with a lot of NIC, >> we need >> > more document from Dev about this patch. >> > > Currently, Qian is working on with Wenzhuo on it now. >> > > >> > > Waterman >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Glynn, Michael J >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:31 AM >> > > To: Cao, Waterman >> > > > >> > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce >> > > >; Zhu= , >> > > Heqing >; >> > > O'Driscoll, Tim >> > > >; Mcnamara, >> > > John > >> > > Subject: FW: DPDK link speed with Intel devices >> > > Importance: High >> > > >> > > Hi Waterman, all >> > > >> > > See below - are you aware? And if so where are we with >> testing/resolution? >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > Mike >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Thomas Monjalon >> > > >> > [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] >> > > Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 2:19 PM >> > > To: O'Driscoll, Tim >> > > >; Glynn, >> > > Michael J >> > > >; Zhu, >> > > Heqing > >> > > Cc: vincent.jardin@6wind.com >> > > Subject: DPDK link speed with Intel devices >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > We are still waiting for test feedbacks for this important patchset: >> > > ethdev: 100G and link speed API refactoring It is possible >> that it >> > breaks the autonegotiation in e1000/ixgbe/i40e. >> > > >> > > Thanks for taking care. >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> >