[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eal: PCI domain should be 32 bits

Chang, Cunyin cunyin.chang at intel.com
Mon Jun 26 06:29:02 CEST 2017



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen at networkplumber.org]
> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 1:47 AM
> To: Chang, Cunyin <cunyin.chang at intel.com>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin at microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eal: PCI domain should be 32 bits
> 
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:41:43 +0000
> "Chang, Cunyin" <cunyin.chang at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen at networkplumber.org]
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 11:52 PM
> > > To: Chang, Cunyin <cunyin.chang at intel.com>
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin at microsoft.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eal: PCI domain should be 32
> > > bits
> > >
> > > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:28:31 +0000
> > > "Chang, Cunyin" <cunyin.chang at intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think the series patches does not cover all area which need to
> > > > adapt to u32 PCI domain, We still need some other work to do:
> > > > we need define another macro such as PCI_PRI_FMT. Something like:
> > > > #define PCI_XXX_PRI_FMT "%.5" PRIx32 ":%.2" PRIx8 ":%.2" PRIx8 ".%"
> > > > PRIx8
> > > >
> > > > PCI_PRI_STR_SIZE also need to be modified:
> > > > #define PCI_PRI_STR_SIZE sizeof("XXXXX:XX:XX.X")
> > > >
> > > > The macro PCI_PRI_FMT will not works if The domain exceed 16bits.
> > > > It will impact the following functions:
> > > > 1  RTE_LOG function, there a lots of RTE_LOG such as:
> > > > RTE_LOG(WARNING, EAL,
> > > > 			"Requested device " PCI_PRI_FMT " cannot be
> > > used\n",
> > > > 			addr->domain, addr->bus, addr->devid, addr-
> function);
> > > > 2  pci_dump_one_device().
> > > > 3 rte_eal_pci_device_name()
> > > > 4 pci_update_device()
> > > > 5 pci_ioport_map()
> > > > 6 pci_get_uio_dev()
> > > > 7 pci_uio_map_resource_by_index()
> > > > 8 pci_uio_ioport_map()
> > > > 9 pci_vfio_map_resource()
> > > > 10 pci_vfio_unmap_resource()
> > > > All the above functions will related with the macro PCI_PRI_FMT,
> > > >so I think
> > > they need to be modified too.
> > > >
> > > > There are some other code need modify:
> > > > In function rte_eal_compare_pci_addr(), we need do the following
> work:
> > > > dev_addr = ((uint64_t)addr->domain << 24) | ((uint64_t)addr->bus <<
> 16) |
> > > > 				((uint64_t)addr->devid << 8) |
> > > (uint64_t)addr->function;
> > > > dev_addr2 = ((uint64_t)addr2->domain << 24) |
> > > > ((uint64_t)addr2->bus <<
> > > 16) |
> > > > 				((uint64_t)addr2->devid << 8) |
> > > (uint64_t)addr2->function;
> > > >
> > > > In function eal_parse_pci_BDF(), we need do the following work:
> > > > GET_PCIADDR_FIELD(input, dev_addr->domain, UINT32_MAX, ':');
> > >
> > > Good catch, the string size must be increased.
> > >
> > > It turns out that you don't need to change the PCI print format.
> > > Printing the domain with %.4x works correctly with 32 bit. It just
> > > gets wider. This is how pciutils works, so no change is necessary there.
> >
> > I suppose we should use %4x, not %.4x?, the %.4x will cut the
> 10000:05:00.0 as 0000:05:00.0.
> > So the macro:
> > #define PCI_PRI_FMT "%.4" PRIx32 ":%.2" PRIx8 ":%.2" PRIx8 ".%" PRIx8
> > Should be:
> > #define PCI_PRI_FMT "%4" PRIx32 ":%.2" PRIx8 ":%.2" PRIx8 ".%" PRIx8
> >
> > Make sense?
> 
> No, that format would not be correct. I want to keep the visible output the
> same for the normal case of 16 bit domains.  Output of printf test program
> shows that %.4x is the correct format to use.
> 
> Domain            %4x       %.4x      %4.4x
> 0                   0       0000       0000
> 0x1                 1       0001       0001
> 0x1000           1000       1000       1000
> 0x10000         10000      10000      10000
> 0x12345678   12345678   12345678   12345678
> 0xdeadbeef   deadbeef   deadbeef   deadbeef
> 
Looks good. No more questions about this.


More information about the dev mailing list