From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D4E7CEC for ; Tue, 8 May 2018 12:58:09 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 May 2018 03:58:08 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,378,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="47609305" Received: from fyigit-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.77]) ([10.237.221.77]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 May 2018 03:58:06 -0700 To: Shahaf Shuler , Wei Dai , Thomas Monjalon Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" References: <1525311040-26694-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> <1525442529-12723-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=ferruh.yigit@intel.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsFNBFXZCFABEADCujshBOAaqPZpwShdkzkyGpJ15lmxiSr3jVMqOtQS/sB3FYLT0/d3+bvy qbL9YnlbPyRvZfnP3pXiKwkRoR1RJwEo2BOf6hxdzTmLRtGtwWzI9MwrUPj6n/ldiD58VAGQ +iR1I/z9UBUN/ZMksElA2D7Jgg7vZ78iKwNnd+vLBD6I61kVrZ45Vjo3r+pPOByUBXOUlxp9 GWEKKIrJ4eogqkVNSixN16VYK7xR+5OUkBYUO+sE6etSxCr7BahMPKxH+XPlZZjKrxciaWQb +dElz3Ab4Opl+ZT/bK2huX+W+NJBEBVzjTkhjSTjcyRdxvS1gwWRuXqAml/sh+KQjPV1PPHF YK5LcqLkle+OKTCa82OvUb7cr+ALxATIZXQkgmn+zFT8UzSS3aiBBohg3BtbTIWy51jNlYdy ezUZ4UxKSsFuUTPt+JjHQBvF7WKbmNGS3fCid5Iag4tWOfZoqiCNzxApkVugltxoc6rG2TyX CmI2rP0mQ0GOsGXA3+3c1MCdQFzdIn/5tLBZyKy4F54UFo35eOX8/g7OaE+xrgY/4bZjpxC1 1pd66AAtKb3aNXpHvIfkVV6NYloo52H+FUE5ZDPNCGD0/btFGPWmWRmkPybzColTy7fmPaGz cBcEEqHK4T0aY4UJmE7Ylvg255Kz7s6wGZe6IR3N0cKNv++O7QARAQABzSVGZXJydWggWWln aXQgPGZlcnJ1aC55aWdpdEBpbnRlbC5jb20+wsF+BBMBAgAoAhsDBgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsE FgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCWZR3VQUJB33WBQAKCRD5M+tD3xNhH6DWEACVhEb8q1epPwZrUDoxzu7E TS1b8tmabOmnjXZRs6+EXgUVHkp2xxkCfDmL3pa5bC0G/74aJnWjNsdvE05V1cb4YK4kRQ62 FwDQ+hlrFrwFB3PtDZk1tpkzCRHvJgnIil+0MuEh32Y57ig6hy8yO8ql7Lohyrnpfk/nNpm4 jQGEF5qEeHcEFe1AZQlPHN/STno8NZSz2nl0b2cw+cujN1krmvB52Ah/2KugQ6pprVyrGrzB c34ZQO9OsmSjJlETCZk6EZzuhfe16iqBFbOSadi9sPcJRwaUQBid+xdFWl7GQ8qC3zNPibSF HmU43yBZUqJDZlhIcl6/cFpOSjv2sDWdtjEXTDn5y/0FsuY0mFE78ItC4kCTIVk17VZoywcd fmbbnwOSWzDq7hiUYuQGkIudJw5k/A1CMsyLkoUEGN3sLfsw6KASgS4XrrmPO4UVr3mH5bP1 yC7i1OVNpzvOxtahmzm481ID8sk72GC2RktTOHb0cX+qdoiMMfYgo3wRRDYCBt6YoGYUxF1p msjocXyqToKhhnFbXLaZlVfnQ9i2i8jsj9SKig+ewC2p3lkPj6ncye9q95bzhmUeJO6sFhJg Hiz6syOMg8yCcq60j07airybAuHIDNFWk0gaWAmtHZxLObZx2PVn2nv9kLYGohFekw0AOsIW ta++5m48dnCoAc7BTQRX1ky+ARAApzQNvXvE2q1LAS+Z+ni2R13Bb1cDS1ZYq1jgpR13+OKN ipzd8MPngRJilXxBaPTErhgzR0vGcNTYhjGMSyFIHVOoBq1VbP1a0Fi/NqWzJOowo/fDfgVy K4vuitc/gCJs+2se4hdZA4EQJxVlNM51lgYDNpjPGIA43MX15OLAip73+ho6NPBMuc5qse3X pAClNhBKfENRCWN428pi3WVkT+ABRTE0taxjJNP7bb+9TQYNRqGwnGzX5/XISv44asWIQCaq vOkXSUJLd//cdVNTqtL1wreCVVR5pMXj7VIrlk07fmmJVALCmGbFr53BMb8O+8dgK2A5mitM n44d+8KdJWOwziRxcaMk/LclmZS3Iv1TERtiWt98Y9AjeAtcgYPkA3ld0BcUKONogP8pHVz1 Ed3s5rDQ91yr1S0wuAzW91fxGUO4wY+uPmxCtFVuBgd9VT9NAKTUL0qHM7CDgCnZPe0TW6Zj 8OqtdCCyAfvU9cW5xWM7Icxhde6AtPxhDSBwE8fL2ZmrDmaA4jmUKXp3i4JxRPSX84S08b+s DWXHPxy10UFU5A7EK/BEbZAKBwn9ROfm+WK+6X5xOGLoRE++OqNuUudxC1GDyLOPaqCbBCS9 +P6HsTHzxsjyJa27n4jcrcuY3P9TEcFJYSZSeSDh8mVGvugi0exnSJrrBZDyVCcAEQEAAcLB ZQQYAQIADwIbDAUCWZR1ZwUJA59cIQAKCRD5M+tD3xNhH5b+D/9XG44Ci6STdcA5RO/ur05J EE3Ux1DCHZ5V7vNAtX/8Wg4l4GZfweauXwuJ1w7Sp7fklwcNC6wsceI+EmNjGMqfIaukGetG +jBGqsQ7moOZodfXUoCK98gblKgt/BPYMVidzlGC8Q/+lZg1+o29sPnwImW+MXt/Z5az/Z17 Qc265g+p5cqJHzq6bpQdnF7Fu6btKU/kv6wJghENvgMXBuyThqsyFReJWFh2wfaKyuix3Zyj ccq7/blkhzIKmtFWgDcgaSc2UAuJU+x9nuYjihW6WobpKP/nlUDu3BIsbIq09UEke+uE/QK+ FJ8PTJkAsXOf1Bc2C0XbW4Y2hf103+YY6L8weUCBsWC5VH5VtVmeuh26ENURclwfeXhWQ9Og 77yzpTXWr5g1Z0oLpYpWPv745J4bE7pv+dzxOrFdM1xNkzY2pvXph/A8OjxZNQklDkHQ7PIB Lki5L2F4XkEOddUUQchJwzMqTPsggPDmGjgLZrqgO+s4ECZK5+nLD3HEpAbPa3JLDaScy+90 Nu1lAqPUHSnP3vYZVw85ZYm6UCxHE4VLMnnJsN09ZhsOSVR+GyP5Nyw9rT1V3lcsuH7M5Naa 2Xobn9m7l9bRCD/Ji8kG15eV1WTxx1HXVQGjdUYDI7UwegBNbwMLh17XDy+3sn/6SgcqtECA Q6pZKA2mTQxEKMLBZQQYAQIADwIbDAUCWZR3hQUJA59eRwAKCRD5M+tD3xNhH4a/D/4jLAZu UhvU1swWcNEVVCELZ0D3LOV14XcY2MXa3QOpeZ9Bgq7YYJ4S5YXK+SBQS0FkRZdjGNvlGZoG ZdpU+NsQmQFhqHGwX0IT9MeTFM8uvKgxNKGwMVcV9g0IOqwBhGHne+BFboRA9362fgGW5AYQ zT0mzzRKEoOh4r3AQvbM6kLISxo0k1ujdYiI5nj/5WoKDqxTwwfuN1uDUHsWo3tzenRmpMyU NyW3Dc+1ajvXLyo09sRRq7BnM99Rix1EGL8Qhwy+j0YAv+FuspWxUX9FxXYho5PvGLHLsHfK FYQ7x/RRbpMjkJWVfIe/xVnfvn4kz+MTA5yhvsuNi678fLwY9hBP0y4lO8Ob2IhEPdfnTuIs tFVxXuelJ9xAe5TyqP0f+fQjf1ixsBZkqOohsBXDfje0iaUpYa/OQ/BBeej0dUdg2JEu4jAC x41HpVCnP9ipLpD0fYz1d/dX0F/VY2ovW6Eba/y/ngOSAR6C+u881m7oH2l0G47MTwkaQCBA bLGXPj4TCdX3lftqt4bcBPBJ+rFAnJmRHtUuyyaewBnZ81ZU2YAptqFM1kTh+aSvMvGhfVsQ qZL2rk2OPN1hg+KXhErlbTZ6oPtLCFhSHQmuxQ4oc4U147wBTUuOdwNjtnNatUhRCp8POc+3 XphVR5G70mnca1E2vzC77z+XSlTyRA== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 11:58:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7] ethdev: check Rx/Tx offloads 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: Tue, 08 May 2018 10:58:10 -0000 On 5/5/2018 7:59 PM, Shahaf Shuler wrote: > Hi Ferruh, Dai, >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7] ethdev: check Rx/Tx offloads >> >> This patch check if a input requested offloading is valid or not. >> Any reuqested offloading must be supported in the device capabilities. >> Any offloading is disabled by default if it is not set in the parameter >> dev_conf->[rt]xmode.offloads to rte_eth_dev_configure( ) and [rt]x_conf- >>> offloads to rte_eth_[rt]x_queue_setup( ). >> From application, a pure per-port offloading can't be enabled on any queue if >> it hasn't been enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> If any offloading is enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ) by application, it is >> enabled on all queues no matter whether it is per-queue or per-port type >> and no matter whether it is set or cleared in [rt]x_conf->offloads to >> rte_eth_[rt]x_queue_setup( ). >> The underlying PMD must be aware that the requested offloadings to PMD >> specific queue_setup( ) function only carries those offloadings only enabled >> for the queue but not enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ) and they are >> certain per-queue type. >> >> This patch can make above such checking in a common way in rte_ethdev >> layer to avoid same checking in underlying PMD. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Dai >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit >> >> --- >> v7: >> Give the maximum freedom for upper application, only minimal checking is >> performed in ethdev layer. >> Only requested specific pure per-queue offloadings are input to underlying >> PMD. >> >> v6: >> No need enable an offload in queue_setup( ) if it has already been enabled >> in dev_configure( ) >> >> v5: >> keep offload settings sent to PMD same as those from application >> >> v4: >> fix a wrong description in git log message. >> >> v3: >> rework according to dicision of offloading API in community >> >> v2: >> add offloads checking in rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> check if a requested offloading is supported. >> --- >> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 150 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 150 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >> index e560524..0ad05eb 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >> @@ -1139,6 +1139,28 @@ rte_eth_dev_configure(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t >> nb_rx_q, uint16_t nb_tx_q, >> ETHER_MAX_LEN; >> } >> >> + /* Any requested offloading must be within its device capabilities */ >> + if ((local_conf.rxmode.offloads & dev_info.rx_offload_capa) != >> + local_conf.rxmode.offloads) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("ethdev port_id=%d requested Rx >> offloads " >> + "0x%" PRIx64 " doesn't match Rx offloads " >> + "capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", >> + port_id, >> + local_conf.rxmode.offloads, >> + dev_info.rx_offload_capa); >> + return -EINVAL; > > While I am OK with such behavior, we should be more careful not to get into the same issue as in [1]. > There are PMD which don't report the capabilities correctly however do expect to have the offload configured. > > All I am saying it is worth a check and cautious decision if it is right to include this one w/o prior application notice and at such late RC of the release. This is valid concern. I think this is better than [1] which was less clear than this check but yes still a concern. > >> + } >> + if ((local_conf.txmode.offloads & dev_info.tx_offload_capa) != >> + local_conf.txmode.offloads) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("ethdev port_id=%d requested Tx >> offloads " >> + "0x%" PRIx64 " doesn't match Tx offloads " >> + "capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", >> + port_id, >> + local_conf.txmode.offloads, >> + dev_info.tx_offload_capa); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> /* Check that device supports requested rss hash functions. */ >> if ((dev_info.flow_type_rss_offloads | >> dev_conf->rx_adv_conf.rss_conf.rss_hf) != @@ -1414,6 +1436,8 >> @@ rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t rx_queue_id, >> struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info; >> struct rte_eth_rxconf local_conf; >> void **rxq; >> + uint64_t pure_port_offload_capa; >> + uint64_t only_enabled_for_queue; >> >> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL); >> >> @@ -1504,6 +1528,68 @@ rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, >> uint16_t rx_queue_id, >> &local_conf.offloads); >> } >> >> + /* >> + * The requested offloadings by application for this queue >> + * can be per-queue type or per-port type. and >> + * they must be within the device offloading capabilities. >> + */ >> + if ((local_conf.offloads & dev_info.rx_offload_capa) != >> + local_conf.offloads) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Ethdev port_id=%d >> rx_queue_id=%d " >> + "Requested offload 0x%" PRIx64 "doesn't " >> + "match per-queue capability 0x%" PRIx64 >> + " in %s\n", >> + port_id, >> + rx_queue_id, >> + local_conf.offloads, >> + dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa, >> + __func__); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * A pure per-port offloading can't be enabled for any queue >> + * if it hasn't been enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> + * >> + * Following pure_port_offload_capa is the capabilities which >> + * can't be enabled on some queue while disabled on other queue. >> + * pure_port_offload_capa must be enabled or disabled on all >> + * queues at same time. >> + * >> + * Following only_enabled_for_queue is the offloadings which >> + * are enabled for this queue but hasn't been enabled in >> + * rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> + */ >> + pure_port_offload_capa = dev_info.rx_offload_capa ^ >> + dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa; >> + only_enabled_for_queue = (local_conf.offloads ^ >> + dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads) & >> local_conf.offloads; > > It looks like above logic could be a lot simpler. > > How about: > local_conf.offloads &= ~dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads; // keep only the added offloads on top of the port ones > if ((local_conf.offloads & dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa) != > local_conf.offloads) { //check if added offloads are part of the queue offload capa > ERROR... +1 > > >> + if (only_enabled_for_queue & pure_port_offload_capa) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Ethdev port_id=%d >> rx_queue_id=%d, only " >> + "enabled offload 0x%" PRIx64 "for this " >> + "queue haven't been enabled in " >> + "dev_configure( ), they are within " >> + "pure per-port capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 > > Need to re-work this error message. The user doesn't know what are "pure per-port capabilities" +1 > >> + " in %s\n", >> + port_id, >> + rx_queue_id, >> + only_enabled_for_queue, >> + pure_port_offload_capa, >> + __func__); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * If an offloading has already been enabled in >> + * rte_eth_dev_configure(), it has been enabled on all queues, >> + * so there is no need to enable it in this queue again. >> + * The local_conf.offloads input to underlying PMD only carries >> + * those offloadings which are only enabled on this queue and >> + * not enabled on all queues. >> + * The underlying PMD must be aware of this point. >> + */ >> + local_conf.offloads &= ~dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads; >> + >> ret = (*dev->dev_ops->rx_queue_setup)(dev, rx_queue_id, >> nb_rx_desc, >> socket_id, &local_conf, mp); >> if (!ret) { >> @@ -1549,6 +1635,8 @@ rte_eth_tx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, >> uint16_t tx_queue_id, >> struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info; >> struct rte_eth_txconf local_conf; >> void **txq; >> + uint64_t pure_port_offload_capa; >> + uint64_t only_enabled_for_queue; >> >> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL); >> >> @@ -1612,6 +1700,68 @@ rte_eth_tx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, >> uint16_t tx_queue_id, >> &local_conf.offloads); >> } >> >> + /* >> + * The requested offloadings by application for this queue >> + * can be per-queue type or per-port type. and >> + * they must be within the device offloading capabilities. >> + */ >> + if ((local_conf.offloads & dev_info.tx_offload_capa) != >> + local_conf.offloads) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Ethdev port_id=%d >> tx_queue_id=%d " >> + "Requested offload 0x%" PRIx64 "doesn't " >> + "match per-queue capability 0x%" PRIx64 >> + " in %s\n", >> + port_id, >> + tx_queue_id, >> + local_conf.offloads, >> + dev_info.tx_queue_offload_capa, >> + __func__); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * A pure per-port offloading can't be enabled for any queue >> + * if it hasn't been enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> + * >> + * Following pure_port_offload_capa is the capabilities which >> + * can't be enabled on some queue while disabled on other queue. >> + * pure_port_offload_capa must be enabled or disabled on all >> + * queues at same time. >> + * >> + * Following only_enabled_for_queue is the offloadings which >> + * are enabled for this queue but hasn't been enabled in >> + * rte_eth_dev_configure( ). >> + */ >> + pure_port_offload_capa = dev_info.tx_offload_capa ^ >> + dev_info.tx_queue_offload_capa; >> + only_enabled_for_queue = (local_conf.offloads ^ >> + dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads) & >> local_conf.offloads; > > Same comments as in the Rx part. > >> + if (only_enabled_for_queue & pure_port_offload_capa) { >> + RTE_PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Ethdev port_id=%d >> tx_queue_id=%d, only " >> + "enabled offload 0x%" PRIx64 "for this " >> + "queue haven't been enabled in " >> + "dev_configure( ), they are within " >> + "pure per-port capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 >> + " in %s\n", >> + port_id, >> + tx_queue_id, >> + only_enabled_for_queue, >> + pure_port_offload_capa, >> + __func__); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * If an offloading has already been enabled in >> + * rte_eth_dev_configure(), it has been enabled on all queues, >> + * so there is no need to enable it in this queue again. >> + * The local_conf.offloads input to underlying PMD only carries >> + * those offloadings which are only enabled on this queue and >> + * not enabled on all queues. >> + * The underlying PMD must be aware of this point. >> + */ >> + local_conf.offloads &= ~dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads; >> + >> return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_setup)(dev, >> tx_queue_id, nb_tx_desc, socket_id, &local_conf)); } >> -- >> 2.7.5 > > > As for Ferruh's comment >> >> PMDs needs to be updated for: >> 1- Remove existing offload verify checks >> 2- Update offload configure logic based on new values >> >> (1) can be part of this patch. But PMD maintainers should send update >> for (2) if a change required. >> >> cc'ed Shahaf, specially for (2) one. > > I think PMD maintainers can help with that. If it will be integrated enough time before the release Mellanox PMDs can be converted by us. > Thanks. As far as I can see in v8 Wei is adding some code [2] to keep same input for the PMD to not break the logic in PMD. But later PMD can be updated for better support of new offload input to the PMD. [2] + uint64_t offloads = conf->offloads | + dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads; > > > > [1] > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/38645/ > >