> -----Original Message----- > From: David Christensen <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Sent: Friday, August 2, 2019 21:18 > To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@mellanox.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx5: txq_inline_min not set for ConnectX-5 > adapters > > >>> Yes, thank you for the patch, acked. > >>> > >>> The "txq_inline_min" value was not set for ConnectX-5 to 0 as default. > >>> At the TX queue setup time the "txq_inline_min" is checked against > >>> MLX5_ARG_UNSET and default value 0 is set: > >>> > >>> txq_set_params() > >>> ... > >>> inlen_mode = (config->txq_inline_min == MLX5_ARG_UNSET) ? > >>> 0 : (unsigned int)config->txq_inline_min; > >>> > >>> So, there should be no negative backwards. Did you observe any? > >> > >> The gdb session below shows how the value is unchanged after passing > >> through mlx5_set_min_inline on my system without the change. > > > > Yes, mlx5_set_min_inline() does not set txq_inline_min by default. > > So, your patch is OK. > > > > I mean the actual inline_len is set to 0 before actual usage in > > txq_set_params() routine, so not setting config->txq_inline_min to > > default zero should not cause negative backwards. > > So that implies the assert to verify that txq_inline_min >= 0 in > mlx5_set_txlimit_params() is unnecessary. Should the patch change and just > remove the assert? I think no need to change the patch. If I understand correctly this assert helped to catch missing line in mlx5_set_min_inline() which your patch fixes. If so - assert works well and should be kept, IMHO.
Also, please, delegate your patch to Raslan (http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/). Thanks, Slava > > I think the patch is the more logical solution, setting the value at the > source > similar to what's done for all other adapters. > > Dave
