[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix device info getting
Lu, Wenzhuo
wenzhuo.lu at intel.com
Fri Jul 13 03:56:00 CEST 2018
Hi Andrew,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:arybchenko at solarflare.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 4:06 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix device info getting
>
> On 12.07.2018 08:27, Wenzhuo Lu wrote:
> > The device information cannot be gotten correctly before the
> > configuration is set. Because on some NICs the information has
> > dependence on the configuration.
> >
> > Fixes: 3be82f5cc5e3 ("ethdev: support PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters")
> > Signed-off-by: Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>
> > ---
> > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> ---
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> > b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c index 3d556a8..9d60bea 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> > @@ -1017,28 +1017,6 @@ struct rte_eth_dev *
> >
> > RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL);
> >
> > - dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> > -
> > - RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->dev_infos_get, -
> ENOTSUP);
> > - RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->dev_configure, -
> ENOTSUP);
> > -
> > - rte_eth_dev_info_get(port_id, &dev_info);
> > -
> > - /* If number of queues specified by application for both Rx and Tx is
> > - * zero, use driver preferred values. This cannot be done individually
> > - * as it is valid for either Tx or Rx (but not both) to be zero.
> > - * If driver does not provide any preferred valued, fall back on
> > - * EAL defaults.
> > - */
> > - if (nb_rx_q == 0 && nb_tx_q == 0) {
> > - nb_rx_q = dev_info.default_rxportconf.nb_queues;
> > - if (nb_rx_q == 0)
> > - nb_rx_q = RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_RX_NBQUEUES;
> > - nb_tx_q = dev_info.default_txportconf.nb_queues;
> > - if (nb_tx_q == 0)
> > - nb_tx_q = RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_TX_NBQUEUES;
> > - }
> > -
> > if (nb_rx_q > RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT) {
> > RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,
> > "Number of RX queues requested (%u) is greater
> than max
> > supported(%d)\n", @@ -1053,6 +1031,11 @@ struct rte_eth_dev *
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> > +
> > + RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->dev_infos_get, -
> ENOTSUP);
> > + RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->dev_configure, -
> ENOTSUP);
> > +
> > if (dev->data->dev_started) {
> > RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,
> > "Port %u must be stopped to allow configuration\n",
> @@ -1060,8
> > +1043,26 @@ struct rte_eth_dev *
> > return -EBUSY;
> > }
> >
> > - /* Copy the dev_conf parameter into the dev structure */
> > + /* Copy the dev_conf parameter into the dev structure,
> > + * then get the info.
> > + */
> > memcpy(&dev->data->dev_conf, &local_conf,
> > sizeof(dev->data->dev_conf));
> > + rte_eth_dev_info_get(port_id, &dev_info);
> > +
> > + /* If number of queues specified by application for both Rx and Tx is
> > + * zero, use driver preferred values. This cannot be done individually
> > + * as it is valid for either Tx or Rx (but not both) to be zero.
> > + * If driver does not provide any preferred valued, fall back on
> > + * EAL defaults.
> > + */
> > + if (nb_rx_q == 0 && nb_tx_q == 0) {
> > + nb_rx_q = dev_info.default_rxportconf.nb_queues;
> > + if (nb_rx_q == 0)
> > + nb_rx_q = RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_RX_NBQUEUES;
> > + nb_tx_q = dev_info.default_txportconf.nb_queues;
> > + if (nb_tx_q == 0)
> > + nb_tx_q = RTE_ETH_DEV_FALLBACK_TX_NBQUEUES;
>
> Values assigned in this branch are not checked against
> RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT and RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT now
O, I supposed the default values cannot be larger than RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT. But, yes, it's each NIC's decision. My assumption can be wrong. I'll move the check down here.
>
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Check that the numbers of RX and TX queues are not greater
More information about the dev
mailing list