From: Ferruh Yigit <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Lance Richardson <email@example.com>
Cc: Ajit Khaparde <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Somnath Kotur <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/12] net/bnxt: fix rxq/txq get information
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:05:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
On 9/18/2020 7:41 PM, Lance Richardson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 10:41 AM Ferruh Yigit <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> - qinfo->conf.rx_drop_en = 0;
>>> + qinfo->conf.rx_drop_en = 1;
>> Why 0 is wrong but 1 is correct?
>> Technically 'rx_drop_en' is a user configuration, which is set via
>> 'rte_eth_rx_queue_setup()' API.
>> bnxt seems not honoring this config option at all.
>> Based on HW capability, I think two things can be done,
>> 1) Configure the HW based on config request, and return configured value in
>> 'bnxt_rxq_info_get_op()'. see 'ixgbe'.
>> 2) If HW is not configurable, check the value in 'rte_eth_rx_queue_setup()'
>> a) return error if unsupported value requested. see 'sfc'.
>> b) log a warning and overwrite the requested config with whatever supported.
>> And for both a & b, return current config in the 'bnxt_rxq_info_get_op()'
>>> qinfo->conf.rx_deferred_start = rxq->rx_deferred_start;
>>> + qinfo->conf.offloads = dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads;
> Hi Ferruh,
> Apologies, this somehow didn't make it to my inbox.
> I believe case (2) applies here, rx_drop_en is not currently configurable in hw,
> so this change was intended to accurately report the effective value. I'm not
> sure whether (2a) or (2b) would be better, but (2b) seems less likely to cause
> issues for existing applications.
I guess (2a) may cause more issues with existing applications,
applications previously running without problem may now start failing if
PMD starts returning error.
In (2b) execution will be same, and if PMD already doesn't support NOT
dropping, functionality will be same, only configuration will reflect
what is actually happening instead of what user thinks happening.
>> This is for queue specific offloads, you are returning port offloads.
>> As far as I can see bnxt doesn't have any queue specific offload, so this can be
> It wasn't clear to me whether this was intended to report the difference between
> the offload configuration for the queue and the offload configuration
> for the port
> or the effective offload configuration for the queue. I noticed that
> several other
> PMDs (e.g. mlx5, netvsc, sfc) report the offload configuration for the port in
> rx/tx_queue_info_get(). The sfc PMD reports the offload configuration for the
> port combined with queue-specific offloads, based on those examples this
> seemed to be correct. I guess you're saying those are also incorrect?
May bad, they look OK, "the effective offload configuration for the
queue" makes more sense here.
I guess I confused same fields should hold the queue specific offloads
when used for 'rte_eth_rx_queue_setup()'
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-21 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-09 15:52 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/12] net/bnxt: vector PMD improvements Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 01/12] net/bnxt: fix burst mode get for Arm Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/12] net/bnxt: fix rxq/txq get information Lance Richardson
2020-09-11 14:41 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-18 18:41 ` Lance Richardson
2020-09-21 11:05 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/12] net/bnxt: use appropriate type for Rx mbuf ring Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 04/12] net/bnxt: require async cq for vector mode Lance Richardson
2020-09-11 15:02 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-11 15:07 ` Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 05/12] net/bnxt: improve support for small ring sizes Lance Richardson
2020-09-14 22:03 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-15 14:12 ` Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 06/12] net/bnxt: use smaller cq when agg ring not needed Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 07/12] net/bnxt: increase max burst size for vector mode Lance Richardson
2020-09-11 15:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-11 15:38 ` Lance Richardson
2020-09-11 15:56 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-09 15:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 08/12] net/bnxt: use table-based packet type translation Lance Richardson
2020-09-09 15:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/12] net/bnxt: table-based handling for ol flags Lance Richardson
2020-09-11 3:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/12] net/bnxt: vector PMD improvements Ajit Khaparde
2020-09-11 15:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).