On 2024/4/2 4:07, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 30/03/2024 12:38, huangdengdui:
>> But, there are different solutions for the device to report the setting
>> lane capability, as following:
>> 1. Like the current patch, reporting device capabilities in speed and
>>    lane coupling mode. However, if we use this solution, we will have
>>    to couple the the lanes setting with speed setting.
>>
>> 2. Like the Damodharam's RFC patch [1], the device reports the maximum
>>    number of supported lanes. Users can config a lane randomly,
>>    which is completely separated from the speed.
>>
>> 3. Similar to the FEC capability reported by a device, the device reports the
>>    relationship table of the number of lanes supported by the speed,
>>    for example:
>>       speed    lanes_capa
>>       50G      1,2
>>       100G     1,2,4
>>       200G     2,4
>>
>> Options 1 and 2 have been discussed a lot above.
>>
>> For solution 1, the speed and lanes are over-coupled, and the implementation 
>> is too
>> complex. But I think it's easier to understand and easier for the device to 
>> report
>> capabilities. In addition, the ethtool reporting capability also uses this 
>> mode.
>>
>> For solution 2, as huisong said that user don't know what lanes should or 
>> can be set
>> for a specified speed on one NIC.
>>
>> I think that when the device reports the capability, the lanes should be 
>> associated
>> with the speed. In this way, users can know which lanes are supported by the 
>> current
>> speed and verify the configuration validity.
>>
>> So I think solution 3 is better. What do you think?
> 
> I don't understand your proposals.
> Please could you show the function signature for each option?
> 
> 

I agree with separating the lanes setting from the speed setting.
I have a different proposal for device lanes capability reporting.

Three interfaces are added to the lib/ethdev like FEC interfaces.
1. rte_eth_lanes_get(uint16_t port_id, uint32_t *capa)       /* get current 
lanes */
2. rte_eth_lanes_set(uint16_t port_id, uint32_t capa)
3. rte_eth_lanes_get_capa(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_lanes_capa 
*speed_lanes_capa)

/* A structure used to get capabilities per link speed */
struct rte_eth_lanes_capa {
        uint32_t speed; /**< Link speed (see RTE_ETH_SPEED_NUM_*) */
        uint32_t capa;  /**< lanes capabilities bitmask */
};

For example, an ethdev report the following lanes capability array:
struct rte_eth_lanes_capa[] device_capa = {
        { RTE_ETH_SPEED_NUM_50G, 0x0003 }, //supports lanes 1 and 2 for 50G
        { RTE_ETH_SPEED_NUM_100G, 0x000B } //supports lanes 1, 2 and 4 for 100G
};

The application can know which lanes are supported at a specified speed.

I think it's better to implement the setting lanes feature in this way.

Welcom to jump into discuss.

Reply via email to