Intel QAT 8970 accel card on ARM Ampere Server

[Patrick Robb]

On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 2:35 AM Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang at arm.com> wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
>
>
> It seems kernel v5.15 has a defect on this. A similar issue was fixed by
> commit:
>
> 40da865381ad ("crypto: qat - remove unneeded packed attribute")
>
>
>
> Could you patch the kernel and try again?
>
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=40da865381ad061ab75a7a9da469ed4e623bdfeb
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ruifeng
>
>
>
Hi Ruifeng,

Sorry for the delay on this - there has been a work item backlog at the
Community Lab we've been working through.

I did rebuild the patch today with these changes from the commit (or
similar, as the commit above was for the qat_common file in a different
state, but I tried to remain as true to the commit as possible).

And that does seem to have resolved the seg fault problem! Thank you so
much for picking this commit out of obscurity and sending it our way!

root at arm-ampere-dut:~# echo 16 >
/sys/bus/pci/drivers/c6xx/0000:03:00.0/sriov_numvfs
root at arm-ampere-dut:~# cat
/sys/bus/pci/drivers/c6xx/0000:03:00.0/sriov_numvfs
16

Wunderbar!

The only other thing I changed (just because I was floating the idea with
Dharmik before) was in the kernel .config I changed the qat_c62x and
qat_c62xvf modules from statically built in (=y) to loadable (=m). Of
course, this should not matter, and I presume the change in behavior
relates to those brought in from the commit above. I just want to present
fully all changes made so there is a complete picture.

I will continue on this tomorrow according to where this conversation left
off, and try to move this quickly. If indeed there are no more blockers I
think we are very close. As a reminder, when standing up a new testing
plan, we want to make sure at least 1 rep from each vendor has SSH access
and can remotely login to help with system tuning, troubleshooting, etc.
for the testbed and test plan. Who would be the best person from ARM for
this at this time, given the context on QAT testing? Ruifeng? Dharmik?
Someone else?

Thanks, I'll keep yall apprised of the situation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/ci/attachments/20240227/f2ff6632/attachment.htm>