On 12/3/2020 9:45 AM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
Hi, Ferruh
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 14:07
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas
Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Wei Hu (Xavier)
<huwei...@chinasoftinc.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; xavier.hu...@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/6] app/testpmd: remove restriction on
txpkts set
On 11/27/2020 1:05 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2020 14:38
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas
Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Wei Hu (Xavier)
<huwei...@chinasoftinc.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; xavier.hu...@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/6] app/testpmd: remove
restriction on txpkts set
On 11/26/2020 7:24 AM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
The bug:
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbu
gs
.dpdk.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D584&data=04%7C01%7Cviacheslavo
%40n
vidia.com%7Ce52ba5bbab184ac8592808d8920842c5%7C43083d15727340c1b7
db39e
fd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637419911462011700%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3
d8eyJWIjo
iMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000
&
;sdata=QBB67WqEjUHgwqHNjqx2VLdaTRMzMeodh%2B%2FVFsHByQg%3D&am
p;reserved
=0
Can we pass the nb_segs = 1 always?
One descriptor is minimal basic capability to send, it should be
always
supported.
Hi Slava,
I didn't get your comment, can you please elaborate?
The --txpkts is rejected on testpmd startup due to port is not
configured yet and we can't find out how many descriptors are actually
configured in the Tx queues.
Configuring Tx queues with zero descriptors seems to be meaningless,
it would disable a basic capability to send the packets. And we could
assume the single segment packet sending is always supported.
If --txpkts sets only the size for the single segment we can assume
that the packets with only one segment is going to be sent, and we
could ignore the Tx queue descriptor number check for the case.
Overall I was OK to remove the check completely, even multi segment used it
is very unlikely that number of segments will be more than descriptor size.
But at least OK to ignore the check for single segment, also we can force
'--txd'
parameter provided to enable '--txpkts', like done before.
OK, I'll provide the patch taking both approaches on testpmd startup:
- if --txd is specified the check will be done against it, failed check for
non-configured port will be ignored
- if there is the only one segment specified in txpkts, failed check for
non-configured port will be ignored
Sounds good, thank you.
With best regards, Slava
With best regards, Slava
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 16:07
To: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Wei Hu
(Xavier) <huwei...@chinasoftinc.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; xavier.hu...@huawei.com; Slava Ovsiienko
<viachesl...@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/6] app/testpmd: remove
restriction on txpkts set
On 11/24/2020 12:23 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 11/24/2020 10:27 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
Is it OK to keep this regression?
Ferruh, what do you suggest?
I confirm the '--txpkts' parameter is broken now, I suggest
submitting a defect for it and continue with the regression.
Hi Slava,
Can you please submit the Bugzilla defect?
Thanks,
ferruh
We have alternative for the parameter, "set txpkts <len0[,len1]*>"
command.
The parameter was only working when hardcoded '--txd=N' parameter is
provided, the command is more dynamic and works however queue size
is
configured.
We can fix the '--txpkts' in next release.
23/11/2020 12:50, Slava Ovsiienko:
Hi, Wei
It was found this patch rejects the --txpkts command line settings.
set_tx_pkt_segments() is called before device started and we have
failure chain:
set_tx_pkt_segments()
nb_segs_is_invalid()
get_tx_ring_size ()
rte_eth_tx_queue_info_get()
It causes --txpkts testpmd command line option is ignored.
With best regards, Slava
-----Original Message-----
From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Wei Hu (Xavier)
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 15:47
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: xavier.hu...@huawei.com
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/6] app/testpmd: remove
restriction on txpkts set
From: Chengchang Tang <tangchengch...@huawei.com>
Currently, if nb_txd is not set, the txpkts is not allowed to be
set because the nb_txd is used to avoid the numer of segments
exceed the Tx ring size and the default value of nb_txd is 0. And
there is a bug that nb_txd is the global configuration for Tx
ring size and the ring size could be changed by some command per
queue.
So these valid check is unreliable and introduced unnecessary
constraints.
This patch adds a valid check function to use the real Tx ring
size to check the validity of txpkts.
Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengch...@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Wei Hu (Xavier) <xavier.hu...@huawei.com>
---
v3 -> v4:
add check 'rte_eth_rx_queue_info_get()' return value and
if it is '-ENOSTUP' calculate the 'ring_size'.
v3: initial version.
---
app/test-pmd/config.c | 64
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c index
6496d2f..8ebb927 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
@@ -1893,6 +1893,38 @@ tx_queue_id_is_invalid(queueid_t
txq_id)
}
static int
+get_tx_ring_size(portid_t port_id, queueid_t txq_id, uint16_t
+*ring_size) {
+ struct rte_port *port = &ports[port_id];
+ struct rte_eth_txq_info tx_qinfo;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = rte_eth_tx_queue_info_get(port_id, txq_id, &tx_qinfo);
+ if (ret == 0) {
+ *ring_size = tx_qinfo.nb_desc;
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (ret != -ENOTSUP)
+ return ret;
+ /*
+ * If the rte_eth_tx_queue_info_get is not support for this
+PMD,
+ * ring_size stored in testpmd will be used for validity
verification.
+ * When configure the txq by rte_eth_tx_queue_setup with
nb_tx_desc
+ * being 0, it will use a default value provided by PMDs to
+setup this
+ * txq. If the default value is 0, it will use the
+ * RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_TX_RINGSIZE to setup this txq.
+ */
+ if (port->nb_tx_desc[txq_id])
+ *ring_size = port->nb_tx_desc[txq_id];
+ else if (port->dev_info.default_txportconf.ring_size)
+ *ring_size =
+port->dev_info.default_txportconf.ring_size;
+ else
+ *ring_size = RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_TX_RINGSIZE;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int
rx_desc_id_is_invalid(uint16_t rxdesc_id) {
if (rxdesc_id < nb_rxd)
@@ -2986,17 +3018,41 @@ show_tx_pkt_segments(void)
printf("Split packet: %s\n", split);
}
+static bool
+nb_segs_is_invalid(unsigned int nb_segs) {
+ uint16_t ring_size;
+ uint16_t queue_id;
+ uint16_t port_id;
+ int ret;
+
+ RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(port_id) {
+ for (queue_id = 0; queue_id < nb_txq; queue_id++) {
+ ret = get_tx_ring_size(port_id, queue_id,
+&ring_size);
+
+ if (ret)
+ return true;
+
+ if (ring_size < nb_segs) {
+ printf("nb segments per TX packets=%u >= "
+ "TX queue(%u) ring_size=%u - ignored\n",
+ nb_segs, queue_id, ring_size);
+ return true;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
void
set_tx_pkt_segments(unsigned *seg_lengths, unsigned nb_segs)
{
uint16_t tx_pkt_len;
unsigned i;
- if (nb_segs >= (unsigned) nb_txd) {
- printf("nb segments per TX packets=%u >= nb_txd=%u -
ignored\n",
- nb_segs, (unsigned int) nb_txd);
+ if (nb_segs_is_invalid(nb_segs))
return;
- }
/*
* Check that each segment length is greater or equal than
--
2.9.5
