RE: [PATCH] app/testpmd: format dump information of module EEPROM

["Zhang, RobinX" <robinx.zhang@intel.com>]

Hi Ferruh, Thomas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:08 PM
> To: Zhang, RobinX <robinx.zhang@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z
> <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Cc: Li, Xiaoyun <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>; Singh, Aman Deep
> <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>; Zhang, Yuying <yuying.zhang@intel.com>;
> Guo, Junfeng <junfeng.guo@intel.com>; Yang, SteveX
> <stevex.yang@intel.com>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] app/testpmd: format dump information of module
> EEPROM
> 
> 15/02/2022 14:28, Ferruh Yigit:
> > On 2/15/2022 10:18 AM, Robin Zhang wrote:
> > > This patch add a format specific information of different module eeprom.
> > > The format support for SFP(Small Formfactor Pluggable)/SFP+
> > > /QSFP+(Quad Small Formfactor Pluggable)/QSFP28 modules based on
> > > SFF(Small Form Factor) Committee specifications
> > > SFF-8079/SFF-8472/SFF-8024/SFF-8636.
> > >
> >
> > Hi Robin,
> >
> > First of all, can you please clarify the motivation of this patch? Why
> > we are adding this eeprom parsing, and who will be user of this patch?
> >
> >
> > And, just to confirm, this parses the eeprom module based on SFF spec,
> > right? So it doesn't specific or depends any vendor.
> >
> > But still, this is too much SFF specific code in the testpmd, and it
> > is not small amount of code. I am not comfortable to get this into
> > testpmd unless there is a good reason.
> 
> Please remember that testpmd is supposed to be the application for testing
> ethdev API and drivers.
> It doesn't make sense to add code if it does not directly help with the goal
> above.

The idea behind this is to monitor the quality of the link in the field during testpmd operations.
It is supported in Linux driver with ethtool command "ethtool -m xxx", but missing in DPDK.

This feature is requested by customer 6WIND and we have been told this is highly important in production.
6WIND also mentioned some other customers: NEC, EOLO and Open Systems.
Similar request also received from customer CheckPoint.

> 
> > What do you think to have this as a sample application?
> 
> It can be in the directory app/ maybe.
> 

Base on the above background, I'm not sure if customer could accept this feature as a sample application.
@Zhang, Qi Z, could you kindly please share your comments on this?
Thanks.

>