On 9/13/2022 7:51 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
On 9/9/2022 3:36 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
On 9/8/2022 9:44 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
Adds the vNIC initialization logic for the flower PF vNIC. The
flower firmware exposes this vNIC for the purposes of fallback
traffic in the switchdev use-case.
Adds minimal dev_ops for this PF device. Because the device is being
exposed externally to DPDK it should also be configured using DPDK
helpers like rte_eth_configure(). For these helpers to work the
flower logic needs to implements a minimal set of dev_ops.
Signed-off-by: Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com>
Reviewed-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderl...@corigine.com>
<...>
+static int
+nfp_flower_init_pf_vnic(struct nfp_net_hw *hw) {
+ int ret;
+ uint16_t i;
+ uint16_t n_txq;
+ uint16_t n_rxq;
+ uint16_t port_id;
+ unsigned int numa_node;
+ struct rte_mempool *mp;
+ struct nfp_pf_dev *pf_dev;
+ struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev;
+ struct nfp_app_fw_flower *app_fw_flower;
+
+ static const struct rte_eth_conf port_conf = {
+ .rxmode = {
+ .mq_mode = RTE_ETH_MQ_RX_RSS,
+ .offloads = RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM,
+ },
+ .txmode = {
+ .mq_mode = RTE_ETH_MQ_TX_NONE,
+ },
+ };
+
+ /* Set up some pointers here for ease of use */
+ pf_dev = hw->pf_dev;
+ app_fw_flower = NFP_PRIV_TO_APP_FW_FLOWER(pf_dev-
app_fw_priv);
+
+ /*
+ * Perform the "common" part of setting up a flower vNIC.
+ * Mostly reading configuration from hardware.
+ */
+ ret = nfp_flower_init_vnic_common(hw, "pf_vnic");
+ if (ret != 0)
+ goto done;
+
+ hw->eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_allocate("nfp_pf_vnic");
+ if (hw->eth_dev == NULL) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto done;
+ }
+
+ /* Grab the pointer to the newly created rte_eth_dev here */
+ eth_dev = hw->eth_dev;
+
+ numa_node = rte_socket_id();
+
+ /* Fill in some of the eth_dev fields */
+ eth_dev->device = &pf_dev->pci_dev->device;
+ eth_dev->data->dev_private = hw;
+
+ /* Create a mbuf pool for the PF */
+ app_fw_flower->pf_pktmbuf_pool = nfp_flower_pf_mp_create();
+ if (app_fw_flower->pf_pktmbuf_pool == NULL) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto port_release;
+ }
+
+ mp = app_fw_flower->pf_pktmbuf_pool;
+
+ /* Add Rx/Tx functions */
+ eth_dev->dev_ops = &nfp_flower_pf_vnic_ops;
+
+ /* PF vNIC gets a random MAC */
+ eth_dev->data->mac_addrs = rte_zmalloc("mac_addr",
RTE_ETHER_ADDR_LEN, 0);
+ if (eth_dev->data->mac_addrs == NULL) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto mempool_cleanup;
+ }
+
+ rte_eth_random_addr(eth_dev->data->mac_addrs->addr_bytes);
+ rte_eth_dev_probing_finish(eth_dev);
+
+ /* Configure the PF device now */
+ n_rxq = hw->max_rx_queues;
+ n_txq = hw->max_tx_queues;
+ port_id = hw->eth_dev->data->port_id;
+
+ ret = rte_eth_dev_configure(port_id, n_rxq, n_txq, &port_conf);
Still not sure about PMD calling 'rte_eth_dev_configure()', can you
please give more details on what specific configuration is expected with
that call?
The main configuration we need is the number of rx/tx queue.
So we should use the internal api `eth_dev_rx/tx_queue_config` to instead?
nb_rx_q/nb_tx_q are parameters provided by user (via
rte_eth_dev_configure()), won't is wrong for PMD to set a value on its own?
Why nb_rx_q/nb_tx_q are required in the probe() stage? Probe stage is not
to configure the device.
Our nfp card use `control message` to exchange message between PMD and firmware
when we use flower firmware.
The control message is in the form of pkt and we use a `ctrl vNIC` ehtdev as
the agent to send and receive these pkts.
e.g., if we want to create representor port, the PMD must send the
corresponding control message to firmware.
This `ctrl vNIC` is totally user app Invisible, to make it able to send and
receive pkt, we must do some configure steps to this ethdev ourselves firstly.
We can don't use 'rte_eth_dev_configure()', but we still should do the needed
configure steps to make sure the device can work.
How ethdev instance becomes app invisible, unless owner set properly I
think apps can able to see it.
And if needs to be internal, do you really need to create an ethdev? Why
not communicate with HW via internal functions?
Cc'ed Jerin, their driver also communicate with FW before probing.
@Jerin, can you please review this patch and help on the design?
@Thomas, @Andrew, can you please check the design too?
