From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>
To: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>,
Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@nvidia.com>
Cc: andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, liuyonglong@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] app/testpmd: add the explicit check for tunnel TSO offload
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 03:30:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b687e067-5c5b-4daf-8cfd-146c473d3841@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231110081925.14142-3-lihuisong@huawei.com>
On 11/10/2023 8:19 AM, Huisong Li wrote:
> If port don't support TSO of tunnel packets, tell user in advance and
> no need to change other configuration of this port in case of fault spread.
>
> In addition, if some tunnel offloads don't support, which is not an error
> case, the log about this shouldn't be to stderr.
>
Overall patch looks good to me, please check a minor comment below.
> Fixes: 3926dd2b6668 ("app/testpmd: enforce offload capabilities check")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
> ---
> app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> index 25462bdbfc..d3243d016b 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> @@ -5039,28 +5039,22 @@ static void
> check_tunnel_tso_nic_support(portid_t port_id, uint64_t tx_offload_capa)
> {
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: VXLAN TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: VXLAN TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: GRE TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: GRE TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: IPIP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: IPIP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: GENEVE TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: GENEVE TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IP_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: IP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: IP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> if (!(tx_offload_capa & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TNL_TSO))
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "Warning: UDP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> + printf("Warning: UDP TUNNEL TSO not supported therefore not enabled for port %d\n",
> port_id);
> }
>
> @@ -5071,6 +5065,12 @@ cmd_tunnel_tso_set_parsed(void *parsed_result,
> {
> struct cmd_tunnel_tso_set_result *res = parsed_result;
> struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info;
> + uint64_t all_tunnel_tso = RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO |
> + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO |
> + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO |
> + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO |
> + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IP_TNL_TSO |
> + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TNL_TSO;
> int ret;
>
> if (port_id_is_invalid(res->port_id, ENABLED_WARN))
> @@ -5087,26 +5087,21 @@ cmd_tunnel_tso_set_parsed(void *parsed_result,
> if (ret != 0)
> return;
>
> - check_tunnel_tso_nic_support(res->port_id, dev_info.tx_offload_capa);
> + if (ports[res->port_id].tunnel_tso_segsz != 0) {
> + if ((all_tunnel_tso & dev_info.tx_offload_capa) == 0) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "Error: port=%u don't support tunnel TSO offloads.\n",
> + res->port_id);
> + return;
> + }
> + check_tunnel_tso_nic_support(res->port_id, dev_info.tx_offload_capa);
> + }
> +
Instead of having a separate if block, else leg of below if block does
same check [1], what do you think to move above block to there?
> if (ports[res->port_id].tunnel_tso_segsz == 0) {
> - ports[res->port_id].dev_conf.txmode.offloads &=
> - ~(RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IP_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TNL_TSO);
> + ports[res->port_id].dev_conf.txmode.offloads &= ~all_tunnel_tso;
> printf("TSO for tunneled packets is disabled\n");
> } else {
> - uint64_t tso_offloads = (RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IP_TNL_TSO |
> - RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TNL_TSO);
> -
[1] ---> here has same logical condition
> ports[res->port_id].dev_conf.txmode.offloads |=
> - (tso_offloads & dev_info.tx_offload_capa);
> + (all_tunnel_tso & dev_info.tx_offload_capa);
> printf("TSO segment size for tunneled packets is %d\n",
> ports[res->port_id].tunnel_tso_segsz);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-11 3:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-10 8:19 [PATCH v1 0/3] app/testpmd: fix the command to set tunnel TSO Huisong Li
2023-11-10 8:19 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] app/testpmd: fix random value " Huisong Li
2023-11-10 11:42 ` Ivan Malov
2023-11-11 1:17 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-11 3:22 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-11-10 8:19 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] app/testpmd: add the explicit check for tunnel TSO offload Huisong Li
2023-11-11 3:30 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2023-11-11 4:27 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-10 8:19 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] app/testpmd: fix unnecessary change when set tunnel TSO Huisong Li
2023-11-11 3:37 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-11-11 4:28 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-11 4:59 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] app/testpmd: fix the command to " Huisong Li
2023-11-11 4:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] app/testpmd: fix random value " Huisong Li
2023-11-11 4:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] app/testpmd: add the explicit check for tunnel TSO offload Huisong Li
2023-11-11 4:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] app/testpmd: fix unnecessary change when set tunnel TSO Huisong Li
2023-11-11 5:59 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] app/testpmd: fix the command to " Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b687e067-5c5b-4daf-8cfd-146c473d3841@amd.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=aman.deep.singh@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=liuyonglong@huawei.com \
--cc=shahafs@nvidia.com \
--cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \
--cc=yuying.zhang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).