> -----Original Message----- > From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 09:55 > To: Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; Asaf Penso > <as...@nvidia.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/9] ethdev: support SubFunction representor > > On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 03:21:30 +0000 > Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > SubFunction [1] is a portion of the PCI device, a SF netdev has its own > > dedicated queues(txq, rxq). A SF netdev supports E-Switch representation > > offload similar to existing PF and VF representors. A SF shares PCI > > level resources with other SFs and/or with its parent PCI function. > > > > From SmartNIC perspective, when PCI device is shared for multi-host, > > representors for host controller and host PF is required. > > > > This patch set introduces new representor types in addtion to existing > > VF representor. Syntax: > > > > [[c#]pf#]vf#: VF port representor/s from controller/pf > > [[c#]pf#]sf#: SF port representor/s from controller/pf > > #: VF representor - for backwards compatibility > > > > "#" is number instance, list or range, valid examples: > > 1, [1,3,5], [0-3], [0,2-4,6] > > > > For backward compatibility, this patch also introduces new netdev > > capability to indicate the capability of supportting SF representor. > > > > Version history: > > RFC: > > initial version [2] > > V2: > > - separate patch for represnetor infrastructure, controller, pf and > > sf. > > - replace representor ID macro with functions: > > rte_eth_representor_id_encode() > > rte_eth_representor_id_parse() > > - new patch to allow devargs with same PCI BDF but different > > representors. > > - other minor code updates according to comments, thanks Andrew! > > - update document > > V3: > > - improve probing of allowed devargs with same name. > > - parse single word of kvargs as key. > > - update kvargs test cases. > > V4: > > - split first representor refactor patch into > > 1: add representor type > > 2: refector representor list parsing > > - push the patch supporting multi-devargs for same device. > > V5: > > - add comments for parsing functions > > - update switch_representation.rst - Thanks Ajit > > V6: > > - split representor types into different patches, move to > > rte_ethdev.h > > - improvements of rte_eth_devargs_process_list() according to > > Andrew's suggestion > > - fixed PF probe failure for Intel i40e > > - replace ethdev SF capability with rte_eth_representor_info_get() > > - add new ethdev ops api to get representor info from PMD > > - replace representor ID encode/decode with conversion from > > representor info > > - change ethdev representor iterator to use new ID encoding > > > > > > Xueming Li (9): > > ethdev: introduce representor type > > ethdev: support representor port list > > ethdev: support new VF representor syntax > > ethdev: support sub function representor > > ethdev: support PF index in representor > > ethdev: support multi-host in representor > > ethdev: new API to get representor info > > ethdev: representor iterator compare complete info > > kvargs: update parser to support lists > > > > app/test/test_kvargs.c | 46 ++++- > > config/rte_config.h | 1 + > > doc/guides/prog_guide/poll_mode_drv.rst | 13 +- > > .../prog_guide/switch_representation.rst | 35 +++- > > drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_ethdev.c | 7 + > > drivers/net/enic/enic_ethdev.c | 6 + > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 7 + > > drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 7 + > > drivers/net/mlx5/linux/mlx5_os.c | 11 ++ > > lib/librte_ethdev/ethdev_driver.h | 49 ++++- > > lib/librte_ethdev/ethdev_private.c | 173 ++++++++++++------ > > lib/librte_ethdev/ethdev_private.h | 3 - > > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_class_eth.c | 40 ++-- > > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 102 ++++++++++- > > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 53 ++++++ > > lib/librte_ethdev/version.map | 4 + > > lib/librte_kvargs/rte_kvargs.c | 101 +++++++--- > > 17 files changed, 535 insertions(+), 123 deletions(-) > > > > A couple of higher level design questions: > 1. How does Linux and other OS handle this in their API? > 2. This solution seems quite tied into a specific implementation on your > hardware. > Is there a PCI standard for this?
> 3. Maybe a more general solution where these were represented as buses would > allow for other connection methods in the future? It should be "auxiliary bus", I think. ;-) https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/base/auxiliary.c mlx5 subfunction support https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=24a790da0ac4d9bcce2a9becc8799241716672f6
