Hi David, The i40evf_init_vlan() always returns 0. So the change doesn’t affect it. I agree with you. So I will put the "int ret" declaration in the new block in next version.
Thanks. From: David Marchand [mailto:david.march...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 4:26 PM To: Yan, Zhirun <zhirun....@intel.com> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Wang, Haiyue <haiyue.w...@intel.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] net/i40e: support VF request more queues Hello, Zhirun, On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:28 AM Zhirun Yan <zhirun....@intel.com<mailto:zhirun....@intel.com>> wrote: @@ -1515,8 +1545,12 @@ RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP(net_i40e_vf, "* igb_uio | vfio-pci"); static int i40evf_dev_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) { + struct i40e_vf *vf = I40EVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(dev->data->dev_private); struct i40e_adapter *ad = I40E_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_ADAPTER(dev->data->dev_private); + uint16_t num_queue_pairs = RTE_MAX(dev->data->nb_rx_queues, + dev->data->nb_tx_queues); + int ret = 0; /* Initialize to TRUE. If any of Rx queues doesn't meet the bulk * allocation or vector Rx preconditions we will reset it. @@ -1526,7 +1560,21 @@ i40evf_dev_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) ad->tx_simple_allowed = true; ad->tx_vec_allowed = true; - return i40evf_init_vlan(dev); + if (num_queue_pairs != vf->vsi_res->num_queue_pairs) { + PMD_DRV_LOG(INFO, "change queue pairs from %u to %u", + vf->vsi_res->num_queue_pairs, num_queue_pairs); + ret = i40evf_request_queues(dev, num_queue_pairs); + if (ret != 0) + return ret; + + ret = i40evf_dev_reset(dev); + if (ret != 0) + return ret; + } + + i40evf_init_vlan(dev); + + return ret; } static int Did not look too much into this code, but I noticed that with this change, you always return 0, whatever happened with i40evf_init_vlan(). I would have put the "int ret" declaration in the new block and left the return i40evf_init_vlan(dev); as is. Do you have a rationale not to do so ? -- David Marchand
