From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083EEA0A0A; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 18:15:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8378141047; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 18:15:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138A714103D for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 18:15:12 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: zeinmfirga3zOiueCinrgvfpYiRrhtpmEIN+kgReVHIafJVNbXt3NFvYXCHdRt+KZmb6T13VDU QJYM6lIB0npw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9872"; a="179619336" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,367,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="179619336" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2021 09:15:11 -0800 IronPort-SDR: uSIJRVutER70yXA2t6uAGxF2dq0xIbBJ/Hj44RFOI3TFR0VkIRTirBU0thrktHFco+8hlo/l3V xLCMc+dxIZJg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,367,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="385828747" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.222.36]) ([10.213.222.36]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2021 09:15:09 -0800 From: Ferruh Yigit To: Steve Yang , dev@dpdk.org Cc: wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, xiaoyun.li@intel.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com, thomas@monjalon.net, andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, qiming.yang@intel.com References: <20201223085152.20866-1-stevex.yang@intel.com> <20210122090110.50453-1-stevex.yang@intel.com> <20210122090110.50453-4-stevex.yang@intel.com> <564fad2d-3861-f4e3-2129-c0c6b3638d74@intel.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:15:06 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <564fad2d-3861-f4e3-2129-c0c6b3638d74@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] app/testpmd: fix dynamic config error X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 1/22/2021 5:04 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 1/22/2021 9:01 AM, Steve Yang wrote: >> The offloads of 'tx/rx_conf' didn't keep up with the corresponding >> offloads of 'dev_conf' if rx queue capability was 0, it would cause >> the configuration invalid. >> >> For example: >> Configuring 'max-pkt-len' would change 'rx_offloads' in dev_conf while >> rx_conf.offloads of each queue still kept the old value. >> It would cause the failure of offloads check in 'rte_eth_rx_queue_setup'. >> >> This patch applied tx/rx offloads configuration for each queue >> once it changed and corresponding tx/rx queue capability was 0. >> >> Fixes: 5e91aeef218c ("app/testpmd: fix offload flags after port config") >> >> Signed-off-by: Steve Yang >> --- >>   app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> index a2c9aad960..8307c7f9e9 100644 >> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> @@ -3296,7 +3296,11 @@ rxtx_port_config(struct rte_port *port) >>       for (qid = 0; qid < nb_rxq; qid++) { >>           offloads = port->rx_conf[qid].offloads; >>           port->rx_conf[qid] = port->dev_info.default_rxconf; >> -        if (offloads != 0) >> +        if (port->dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa == 0 && >> +            offloads != port->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads) >> +            port->rx_conf[qid].offloads = >> +                port->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads; >> +        else if (offloads != 0) >>               port->rx_conf[qid].offloads = offloads; > > I am still concerned to use port offloads to set the queue specific offloads, > this may lead unexpected result. > > Below is what Steve provided as reproduce steps [1], I think that is application > (testpmd) miss-configuration to update 'max-pkt-len' but not update the > JUMBO_FRAME offload flag and MTU accordingly. > > What do you think update the JUMBO_FRAME offload flag (both for port and queues) > according and set MTU according on the testpmd command where 'max-pkt-len' is > set? This is more like your first version. > > > > [1] > ---------------------------------------------- > # x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/dpdk-testpmd  -c 0xf -n 4  -- -i > --max-pkt-len=9000 --tx-offloads=0x8000 --rxq=4 --txq=4 --disable-rss > testpmd>  set verbose 3 > testpmd>  start > testpmd>  stop > testpmd>  port stop all > testpmd>  port config all max-pkt-len 1518 > testpmd> port start all > Configuring Port 0 (socket 1) > Ethdev port_id=0 rx_queue_id=0, new added offloads 0x800 must be within > per-queue offload capabilities 0x0 in rte_eth_rx_queue_setup() > Fail to configure port 0 rx queues//<-- Fail error info; > ------------------------------------------------ > Indeed first patch of this series solves the MTU problem with "port config all max-pkt-len" command (although it ignores 'max_rx_pkt_len' is only valid when JUMBO_FRAME flag is set) And second patch updates the JUMBO_FRAME flag in the command function, same as I suggested above. Only if second patch extended to update JUMBO_FRAME flag for all queues in 'update_jumbo_frame_offload()', this patch can be dropped, what do you think?