Hi Thomas,
Thanks for comment.
The ixgbevf_negotiate_api is copied from Intel's VF driver. The while
loop is not quite usual, indeed. A direct call to
ixgbevf_negotiate_api_version(hw, ixgbe_mbox_api_11) is sufficient, I
think. Coz PF is supposed to be satisfied with ver 1.1.
I will make another attempt with elimination of ixgbevf_negotiate_api.
Any other comment?
thx &
rgds,
-ql
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Thomas Monjalon
<thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 21/10/2013 09:09, Qinglai Xiao :
>> Physical Function assignes Tx/Rx queues to each VF according to
>> different schemes[1]. By querying through mailbox, VF is able to
>> get number of Tx/Rx queues assigned to it.
>>
>> Note that current Intel ixgbe driver ixgbe-3.18.7 does not fully
>> support mailbox message IXGBE_VF_GET_QUEUES. The service routine
>> for IXGBE_VF_GET_QUEUES must be fixed, otherwise PF always return
>> 1 as Tx/Rx queue number.
>>
>> [1] See section 7.2.1.2.1, 7.1.2.2 and 7.10.2.7.2 of Intel 82599 10
>> Gbe Controller Datasheet.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qinglai Xiao <jigsaw at gmail.com>
>> ---
>
> Thanks for the patch, your comments are clear.
>
>> +static void ixgbevf_negotiate_api(struct ixgbe_hw *hw)
>> +{
>> + int api[] = { ixgbe_mbox_api_11,
>> + ixgbe_mbox_api_10,
>> + ixgbe_mbox_api_unknown };
>> + int err = 0, idx = 0;
>> +
>> + while (api[idx] != ixgbe_mbox_api_unknown) {
>> + err = ixgbevf_negotiate_api_version(hw, api[idx]);
>> + if (!err)
>> + break;
>> + idx++;
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I have comments about the mbox API:
> 1) Why not call directly ixgbevf_negotiate_api_version for ixgbe_mbox_api_11
> only ?
> It seems that only version 1.1 supports ixgbevf_get_queues.
> 2) If a loop is still needed, why not use a simple "for loop" ?
> 3) If ixgbevf_negotiate_api is still needed, I'd prefer to have "_mbx" in its
> name.
>
> Thank you
> --
> Thomas
