> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2022 11:14 PM
> To: Guo, Junfeng <junfeng....@intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z
> <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing...@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei
> <beilei.x...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Li, Xiaoyun <xiaoyun...@intel.com>; Wang, Xiao W
> <xiao.w.w...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 02/18] net/idpf: add support for device initialization
>
> On 10/25/22 11:57, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 10/24/22 16:12, Junfeng Guo wrote:
> >> Support device init and add the following dev ops:
> >> - dev_configure
> >> - dev_close
> >> - dev_infos_get
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Beilei Xing <beilei.x...@intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun...@intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Xiao Wang <xiao.w.w...@intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Junfeng Guo <junfeng....@intel.com>
>
> [snip]
>
> >> +struct idpf_adapter *
> >> +idpf_find_adapter(struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev)
> >
> > It looks like the function requires corresponding lock to be held. If
> > yes, it should be documented and code fixed. If no, it should be
> > explaiend why.
>
> I still don't understand it is a new patch. It is hardly safe to return a
> pointer
> to an element list when you drop lock.
Sorry I misunderstood your last comment, I thought you meant lock for
adapter_list.
I don't think we need a lock for adapter, one adapter here doesn't map one
ethdev,
but one PCI device, we can create some vports for one adapter, and one vport
maps
one ethdev.
>
> >> + /* valid only if rxq_model is split Q */
> >> + uint16_t num_rx_bufq;
> >> +
> >> + uint16_t max_mtu;
> >
> > unused
>
> Comments? It is still in place in a new version.
All the above info is returned by backend when creating a vport, so save it
after creating vport.
>
> >> +int
> >> +idpf_vc_get_caps(struct idpf_adapter *adapter) {
> >> + struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities caps_msg;
> >> + struct idpf_cmd_info args;
> >> + int err;
> >> +
> >> + memset(&caps_msg, 0, sizeof(struct
> >> +virtchnl2_get_capabilities));
> >> + caps_msg.csum_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L3_IPV4 |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_TX_CSUM_GENERIC |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L3_IPV4 |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV4_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_L4_IPV6_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_CSUM_GENERIC;
> >> +
> >> + caps_msg.seg_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV4_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV4_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV4_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV6_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV6_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_IPV6_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SEG_GENERIC;
> >> +
> >> + caps_msg.rss_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_OTHER |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_UDP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_OTHER |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_AH |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_ESP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV4_AH_ESP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_AH |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_ESP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSS_IPV6_AH_ESP;
> >> +
> >> + caps_msg.hsplit_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_HSPLIT_AT_L2 |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_HSPLIT_AT_L3 |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_HSPLIT_AT_L4V4 |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RX_HSPLIT_AT_L4V6;
> >> +
> >> + caps_msg.rsc_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSC_IPV4_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSC_IPV4_SCTP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSC_IPV6_TCP |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RSC_IPV6_SCTP;
> >> +
> >> + caps_msg.other_caps =
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_RDMA |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SRIOV |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_MACFILTER |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_FLOW_DIRECTOR |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_SPLITQ_QSCHED |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_CRC |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_WB_ON_ITR |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_PROMISC |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_LINK_SPEED |
> >> + VIRTCHNL2_CAP_VLAN;
> >
> > I'm wondering why all above capabilities are mentioned in the patch?
> > What does the API do? Do it is request it? Negotiage?
>
> Can I have answer on my question?
I removed some caps in v14, and I think it makes sense adding one cap when
enable the offload.
