> -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang, Qi Z > Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 12:34 AM > To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zh...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org; yamashita.hidey...@po.ntt-tx.co.jp; > step...@networkplumber.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: check jumbo frame enable parameter > > Hi Wei: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Zhao1, Wei > > Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 1:40 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; > > yamashita.hidey...@po.ntt-tx.co.jp; step...@networkplumber.org > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: check jumbo frame enable parameter > > > > Add the background for this patch. > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-November/117771.html > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-November/117772.html > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zhao1, Wei > > > Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 4:29 PM > > > To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zh...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; > > > yamashita.hidey...@po.ntt-tx.co.jp; step...@networkplumber.org > > > Subject: [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: check jumbo frame enable parameter > > > > > > There is necessary to do some check of max packet size boundary for > > > code safe in order to avoid error in register setting when enable jumbo. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zh...@intel.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > v2: > > > -add more log infomation and fix build issue > > > --- > > > drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 4 +--- > > > drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h | 2 ++ > > > drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c | 31 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > > index 5a2c351..d65a911 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > > @@ -173,8 +173,6 @@ static int > > > ixgbe_dev_queue_stats_mapping_set(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev, > > > uint8_t is_rx); > > > static int ixgbe_fw_version_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, char > > *fw_version, > > > size_t fw_size); > > > -static void ixgbe_dev_info_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > - struct rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info); > > > static const uint32_t *ixgbe_dev_supported_ptypes_get(struct > > > rte_eth_dev *dev); static void ixgbevf_dev_info_get(struct > > > rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > struct rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info); @@ - > > > 3692,7 +3690,7 @@ static int > > > ixgbevf_dev_xstats_get_names(__rte_unused > > > struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > -static void > > > +void > > > ixgbe_dev_info_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct rte_eth_dev_info > > > *dev_info) { > > > struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev = RTE_ETH_DEV_TO_PCI(dev); diff -- > > > git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h > > > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h > > > index d0b9396..a474be4 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h > > > @@ -727,6 +727,8 @@ int ixgbe_action_rss_same(const struct > > > rte_flow_action_rss *comp, > > > const struct rte_flow_action_rss *with); int > > > ixgbe_config_rss_filter(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > struct ixgbe_rte_flow_rss_conf *conf, bool add); > > > +void ixgbe_dev_info_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > + struct rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info); > > > > > > static inline int > > > ixgbe_ethertype_filter_lookup(struct ixgbe_filter_info > > > *filter_info, diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > > > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c index 2f0262a..94051ca 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > > > @@ -4814,6 +4814,34 @@ void __attribute__((cold)) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > +static int __attribute__((cold)) > > > +ixgbe_dev_jumboenable_check(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > > + uint16_t max_rx_pkt_len) > > it's better to return Boolean for this function
Ok > > > > +{ > > > + struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info; > > > + > > > + ixgbe_dev_info_get(dev, &dev_info); > > > + > > > + /* check that max packet size is within the allowed range */ > > > + if (max_rx_pkt_len < ETHER_MIN_MTU) { > > > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "max packet size is too small."); > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + } > > Why this is only needed for DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME? > And we will compare to ETHER_MAX_LEN which is a bigger value, this looks > redundant. Ok, I will check that > > > > + > > > + if (max_rx_pkt_len > dev_info.max_rx_pktlen) { > > > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "max packet size is too big."); > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + } > > dev_info.max_rx_pktlen = 15872, it should be replaced by a macro, then we > don't need to call ixgbe_dev_info_get here. > and why this is only needed for DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME? > > > + > > > + /* check jumbo mode if needed */ > > > + if (max_rx_pkt_len < ETHER_MAX_LEN) { > > > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "No need to enable jumbo."); > > > + return -EINVAL; > > And I agree with Stephen's comment, > Looks all of these is common for all drivers, it should be moved to ether > layer. Ok, I will move to rte layer > > > > + } > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > /* > > > * Initializes Receive Unit. > > > */ > > > @@ -4865,6 +4893,9 @@ int __attribute__((cold)) > > > * Configure jumbo frame support, if any. > > > */ > > > if (rx_conf->offloads & DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME) { > > > + if (ixgbe_dev_jumboenable_check(dev, rx_conf- > > > >max_rx_pkt_len)) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > hlreg0 |= IXGBE_HLREG0_JUMBOEN; > > > maxfrs = IXGBE_READ_REG(hw, IXGBE_MAXFRS); > > > maxfrs &= 0x0000FFFF; > > > -- > > > 1.8.3.1