On 4/25/2018 10:18 AM, Ophir Munk wrote: > Hi Ferruh, > > I should have mentioned earlier that TAP does support queue specific > capabilities. > Please look in tap_queue_setup() and note that each TAP queue is created with > a distinct file descriptor (fd). > Then supporting an offload capability is just implementing it in SW (e.g. > calculating IP checksum). > > If the main assumption of this patch was that TAP does not support queue > specific offloads - then please consider this patch again.
Yes that was the initial question, is tap supports queue specific offloads or not. Thanks for the answer. > > On the other hand there is no port specific capability supported by TAP. If so verify functions are wrong, that was the error I got. It seems copy/paste of mlx one but the port_supp_offloads has different meaning there. > However, in order to support legacy applications, port capabilities are > usually reported as the OR operation between queue & port capabilities. > TAP currently clones the queue capabilities to port capabilities. We could > optimize this cloning by always return queue capabilities when queried about > queues or ports. In this case - tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa() and > tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa() could be removed. Instead of removing the functions I think you can keep them but return correct values, in this case return empty, this will make the exiting validation functions correct. Can you send a fix for that? If no fix sent, I suggest going with this patch to remove queue level offload support until it is fixed. > > Please find more comments inline. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 8:54 PM >> To: Pascal Mazon <pascal.ma...@6wind.com> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Mordechay >> Haimovsky <mo...@mellanox.com>; Ophir Munk <ophi...@mellanox.com> >> Subject: [PATCH v3] net/tap: remove queue specific offload support >> >> It is not clear if tap PMD supports queue specific offloads, removing the >> related code. >> >> Fixes: 95ae196ae10b ("net/tap: use new Rx offloads API") >> Fixes: 818fe14a9891 ("net/tap: use new Tx offloads API") >> Cc: mo...@mellanox.com >> >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> >> --- >> Cc: Ophir Munk <ophi...@mellanox.com> >> >> v2: >> * rebased >> >> v3: >> * txq->csum restored, >> - ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_IGNORE check removed since ethdev layer takes care of >> it >> - tx_conf != NULL check removed, this is internal api who calls this is >> ethdev and it doesn't pass null tx_conf >> --- >> drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 102 >> +++++------------------------------------- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c >> index ef33aace9..61b4b5df3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c >> @@ -278,31 +278,6 @@ tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa(void) >> DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP; >> } >> >> -static uint64_t >> -tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(void) >> -{ >> - return DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER | >> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | >> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM | >> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM | >> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP; >> -} >> - > > TAP PMD supports all of these RX queue specific offloads. I suggest to leave > this function in place. > >> -static bool >> -tap_rxq_are_offloads_valid(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint64_t offloads) -{ >> - uint64_t port_offloads = dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads; >> - uint64_t queue_supp_offloads = tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(); >> - uint64_t port_supp_offloads = tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa(); >> - >> - if ((offloads & (queue_supp_offloads | port_supp_offloads)) != >> - offloads) >> - return false; >> - if ((port_offloads ^ offloads) & port_supp_offloads) >> - return false; >> - return true; >> -} >> - > > Putting aside the fact that queue offloads equals port offloads (so could > ignore "port_supp_offload" variable) - this function is essential to validate > that the configured Rx offloads are supported by TAP. I suggest to leave this > function in place. > Without it - testpmd falsely confirms non supported offloads. > For example before this patch: offloading "hw-vlan-filter" will fail as > expected: > > testpmd> port config all > testpmd> port config all hw-vlan-filter on > testpmd> port start all > Configuring Port 0 (socket 0) > PMD: net_tap0: 0x1209fc0: TX configured queues number: 1 > PMD: net_tap0: 0x1209fc0: RX configured queues number: 1 > PMD: 0x1209fc0: Rx queue offloads 0x120e don't match port offloads 0x120e or > supported offloads 0x300e > Fail to configure port 0 rx queues > > However, with this patch this configuration is falsely accepted. > >> /* Callback to handle the rx burst of packets to the correct interface and >> * file descriptor(s) in a multi-queue setup. >> */ >> @@ -411,31 +386,6 @@ tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa(void) >> DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM; >> } >> >> -static uint64_t >> -tap_tx_offload_get_queue_capa(void) >> -{ >> - return DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MULTI_SEGS | >> - DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | >> - DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM | >> - DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM; >> -} >> - > > TAP PMD supports all of these TX queue specific offloads. I suggest to leave > this function in place. > >> -static bool >> -tap_txq_are_offloads_valid(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint64_t offloads) -{ >> - uint64_t port_offloads = dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads; >> - uint64_t queue_supp_offloads = tap_tx_offload_get_queue_capa(); >> - uint64_t port_supp_offloads = tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa(); >> - >> - if ((offloads & (queue_supp_offloads | port_supp_offloads)) != >> - offloads) >> - return false; >> - /* Verify we have no conflict with port offloads */ >> - if ((port_offloads ^ offloads) & port_supp_offloads) >> - return false; >> - return true; >> -} >> - > > This function is essential to validate that the configured Tx offloads are > supported by TAP. > I suggest to leave this function in place. > >> static void >> tap_tx_offload(char *packet, uint64_t ol_flags, unsigned int l2_len, >> unsigned int l3_len) >> @@ -763,12 +713,10 @@ tap_dev_info(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct >> rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info) >> dev_info->max_tx_queues = RTE_PMD_TAP_MAX_QUEUES; >> dev_info->min_rx_bufsize = 0; >> dev_info->speed_capa = tap_dev_speed_capa(); >> - dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa = >> tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(); >> - dev_info->rx_offload_capa = tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa() | >> - dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa; >> - dev_info->tx_queue_offload_capa = >> tap_tx_offload_get_queue_capa(); >> - dev_info->tx_offload_capa = tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa() | >> - dev_info->tx_queue_offload_capa; >> + dev_info->rx_offload_capa = tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa(); >> + dev_info->tx_offload_capa = tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa(); >> + dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa = 0; >> + dev_info->tx_queue_offload_capa = 0; >> } >> > > Rx_queue_offloads_capa should be reported as before: > dev_info->tx_queue_offload_capa = tap_tx_offload_get_queue_capa(); > Same for TX offloads. > > Port capabilities could return queue capabilities: > > Instead of: > > dev_info->rx_offload_capa = tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa() | > dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa; > > We could return: > > dev_info->rx_offload_capa = dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa; > > The same argument is valid for Tx as well. > >> static int >> @@ -1094,19 +1042,6 @@ tap_rx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, >> return -1; >> } >> >> - /* Verify application offloads are valid for our port and queue. */ >> - if (!tap_rxq_are_offloads_valid(dev, rx_conf->offloads)) { >> - rte_errno = ENOTSUP; >> - RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, >> - "%p: Rx queue offloads 0x%" PRIx64 >> - " don't match port offloads 0x%" PRIx64 >> - " or supported offloads 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", >> - (void *)dev, rx_conf->offloads, >> - dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads, >> - (tap_rx_offload_get_port_capa() | >> - tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa())); >> - return -rte_errno; >> - } > > The tap_rxq_are_offloads_valid() call is essential. I suggest to leave it in > place. > The RTE_LOG could drop port references to become: > > RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, > "%p: Rx queue offloads 0x%" PRIx64 > " don't match" > " supported offloads 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", > (void *)dev, rx_conf->offloads, > tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa())); > > >> rxq->mp = mp; >> rxq->trigger_seen = 1; /* force initial burst */ >> rxq->in_port = dev->data->port_id; >> @@ -1175,29 +1110,12 @@ tap_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, >> return -1; >> dev->data->tx_queues[tx_queue_id] = &internals->txq[tx_queue_id]; >> txq = dev->data->tx_queues[tx_queue_id]; >> - /* >> - * Don't verify port offloads for application which >> - * use the old API. >> - */ >> - if (tx_conf != NULL && >> - !!(tx_conf->txq_flags & ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_IGNORE)) { >> - if (tap_txq_are_offloads_valid(dev, tx_conf->offloads)) { >> - txq->csum = !!(tx_conf->offloads & >> - (DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | >> - DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM | >> - DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM)); >> - } else { >> - rte_errno = ENOTSUP; >> - RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, >> - "%p: Tx queue offloads 0x%" PRIx64 >> - " don't match port offloads 0x%" PRIx64 >> - " or supported offloads 0x%" PRIx64, >> - (void *)dev, tx_conf->offloads, >> - dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads, >> - tap_tx_offload_get_port_capa()); >> - return -rte_errno; >> - } >> - } >> + > > The tap_txq_are_offloads_valid() call is essential. I suggest to leave it in > place. > The RTE_LOG message could drop comparison between queue and port capabilities: > > RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, > "%p: Tx queue offloads 0x%" PRIx64 > " don't match" > " supported offloads 0x%" PRIx64, > (void *)dev, tx_conf->offloads, > tap_tx_offload_get_queue_capa()); > >> + txq->csum = !!(tx_conf->offloads & >> + (DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | >> + DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM | >> + DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM)); >> + >> ret = tap_setup_queue(dev, internals, tx_queue_id, 0); >> if (ret == -1) >> return -1; >> -- >> 2.14.3 >
