> -----Original Message----- > From: Vlad Zolotarov [mailto:vladz at cloudius-systems.com] > Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 10:02 PM > To: Ouyang, Changchun; dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/6] ixgbe: Config VF RSS > > > On 01/09/15 08:07, Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Vlad Zolotarov [mailto:vladz at cloudius-systems.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2015 5:43 PM > >> To: Ouyang, Changchun; dev at dpdk.org > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/6] ixgbe: Config VF RSS > >> > >> > >> On 01/07/15 08:32, Ouyang Changchun wrote: > >>> It needs config RSS and IXGBE_MRQC and IXGBE_VFPSRTYPE to enable > VF > >> RSS. > >>> The psrtype will determine how many queues the received packets will > >>> distribute to, and the value of psrtype should depends on both facet: > >>> max VF rxq number which has been negotiated with PF, and the number > >>> of > >> rxq specified in config on guest. > >>> Signed-off-by: Changchun Ouyang <changchun.ouyang at intel.com> > >>> > >>> Changes in v4: > >>> - the number of rxq from config should be power of 2 and should > >>> not > >> bigger than > >>> max VF rxq number(negotiated between guest and host). > >>> > >>> --- > >>> lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_pf.c | 15 ++++++ > >>> lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c | 103 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > >>> 2 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_pf.c > >>> b/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_pf.c index dbda9b5..93f6e43 100644 > >>> --- a/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_pf.c > >>> +++ b/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_pf.c > >>> @@ -187,6 +187,21 @@ int ixgbe_pf_host_configure(struct rte_eth_dev > >> *eth_dev) > >>> IXGBE_WRITE_REG(hw, IXGBE_MPSAR_LO(hw- > mac.num_rar_entries), 0); > >>> IXGBE_WRITE_REG(hw, IXGBE_MPSAR_HI(hw- > mac.num_rar_entries), 0); > >>> > >>> + /* > >>> + * VF RSS can support at most 4 queues for each VF, even if > >>> + * 8 queues are available for each VF, it need refine to 4 > >>> + * queues here due to this limitation, otherwise no queue > >>> + * will receive any packet even RSS is enabled. > >>> + */ > >>> + if (eth_dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.mq_mode == > >> ETH_MQ_RX_VMDQ_RSS) { > >>> + if (RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(eth_dev).nb_q_per_pool == 8) { > >>> + RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(eth_dev).active = > >> ETH_32_POOLS; > >>> + RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(eth_dev).nb_q_per_pool = 4; > >>> + RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(eth_dev).def_pool_q_idx = > >>> + dev_num_vf(eth_dev) * 4; > >>> + } > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> /* set VMDq map to default PF pool */ > >>> hw->mac.ops.set_vmdq(hw, 0, > >>> RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(eth_dev).def_vmdq_idx); > >>> > >>> diff --git a/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > >>> b/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > >>> index f69abda..e83a9ab 100644 > >>> --- a/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > >>> +++ b/lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c > >>> @@ -3327,6 +3327,68 @@ ixgbe_alloc_rx_queue_mbufs(struct > >> igb_rx_queue *rxq) > >>> } > >>> > >>> static int > >>> +ixgbe_config_vf_rss(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) { > >>> + struct ixgbe_hw *hw; > >>> + uint32_t mrqc; > >>> + > >>> + ixgbe_rss_configure(dev); > >>> + > >>> + hw = IXGBE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private); > >>> + > >>> + /* MRQC: enable VF RSS */ > >>> + mrqc = IXGBE_READ_REG(hw, IXGBE_MRQC); > >>> + mrqc &= ~IXGBE_MRQC_MRQE_MASK; > >>> + switch (RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(dev).active) { > >>> + case ETH_64_POOLS: > >>> + mrqc |= IXGBE_MRQC_VMDQRSS64EN; > >>> + break; > >>> + > >>> + case ETH_32_POOLS: > >>> + case ETH_16_POOLS: > >> Isn't ETH_16_POOLS mode is invalid for VF RSS? It's what both spec > >> states and what u handle in this patch in ixgbe_pf_host_configure(). > >> IMHO it would be better to treat this mode value as an error here > >> since if u get it here it indicates of a SW bug. > > I think we discussed it before already, return err here will break here in > > the > case of max vf number is less than 16. > > If doing that, This make the library seems can't support vf rss in the case > > of > max vf num less than 16. > > So we obviously don't hope it break here. > > I don't remember we were discussing these specific lines. However I do > remember we talked about the previous section of this patch. > I'm afraid u are missing my point here: ixgbe_pf_host_configure() is called > before ixgbe_config_vf_rss() in the ixgbe_dev_start() flow. This means that > RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(dev).active will already be adjusted by your (!!!) code > in the ixgbe_pf_host_configure() when u get to > ixgbe_config_vf_rss() and it should not be equal ETH_16_POOLS unless there > is a bug in your code. > > So, unless I've missed something here, don't u think an assert() would be > appropriate if RTE_ETH_DEV_SRIOV(dev).active equals ETH_16_POOLS?
Ooh, thanks for identifying this. Here ETH_16_POOLS branch not necessary, as you said, I Have resolved it in function ixgbe_pf_host_configure. Then I will fix it in v6. Thanks again Changchun
