> -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 12:48 PM > To: Ophir Munk <ophi...@mellanox.com>; Pascal Mazon > <pascal.ma...@6wind.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Mordechay Haimovsky <mo...@mellanox.com>; Olga > Shern <ol...@mellanox.com>; Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; > Raslan Darawsheh <rasl...@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler > <shah...@mellanox.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net/tap: remove queue specific offload support > > 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.
Can you please specify the test you did what error you got? If I fix something I want to verify what I am fixing. > 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 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 > >
