diff mbox

[dpdk-dev,29/53] net/sfc/base: request info about outer frame in Rx events

Message ID 1510819481-6809-30-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted, archived
Delegated to: Ferruh Yigit
Headers

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/checkpatch warning coding style issues
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK

Commit Message

Andrew Rybchenko Nov. 16, 2017, 8:04 a.m. UTC 
  From: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>

For encapsulated packets, the firmware gives info about the inner frame
fields by default. When not using encapsulation offload, ask for info
about the outer frame instead.

Unless bug69842 is fixed, a driver reload will be needed, at least
on some platforms, when switching from full-featured to low-latency
firmware (though users are unlikely to hit that).

Signed-off-by: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
---
 drivers/net/sfc/base/ef10_rx.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Ferruh Yigit Nov. 27, 2017, 7:57 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 11/16/2017 12:04 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> From: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>
> 
> For encapsulated packets, the firmware gives info about the inner frame
> fields by default. When not using encapsulation offload, ask for info
> about the outer frame instead.
> 
> Unless bug69842 is fixed, a driver reload will be needed, at least

I guess this is your internal bug tracking id, this is not very useful in commit
log since we don't have access to it.

Leaving it as it is, but it would be more useful to describe defect here instead
of referring to its id.

> on some platforms, when switching from full-featured to low-latency
> firmware (though users are unlikely to hit that).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>

<...>
Andrew Rybchenko Nov. 28, 2017, 10:48 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 11/27/2017 10:57 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 11/16/2017 12:04 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>> From: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>
>>
>> For encapsulated packets, the firmware gives info about the inner frame
>> fields by default. When not using encapsulation offload, ask for info
>> about the outer frame instead.
>>
>> Unless bug69842 is fixed, a driver reload will be needed, at least
> I guess this is your internal bug tracking id, this is not very useful in commit
> log since we don't have access to it.
>
> Leaving it as it is, but it would be more useful to describe defect here instead
> of referring to its id.
>

Let's rephrase the paragraph in the following way:

On SFN8xxx with firmware version before v6.4.2.1007 driver reload is needed
after switching from full-feature to low-latency firmware variant since 
the driver
still thinks that firmware supports encapsulation, but firmware does not
tolerate request to provide info about outer frame in Rx events.

>> on some platforms, when switching from full-featured to low-latency
>> firmware (though users are unlikely to hit that).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Spender <mspender@solarflare.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
> <...>
>
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/base/ef10_rx.c b/drivers/net/sfc/base/ef10_rx.c
index 4c74d1f..5ede728 100644
--- a/drivers/net/sfc/base/ef10_rx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/sfc/base/ef10_rx.c
@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@  efx_mcdi_init_rxq(
 	__in		boolean_t disable_scatter,
 	__in		uint32_t ps_bufsize)
 {
+	efx_nic_cfg_t *encp = &(enp->en_nic_cfg);
 	efx_mcdi_req_t req;
 	uint8_t payload[MAX(MC_CMD_INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_LEN,
 			    MC_CMD_INIT_RXQ_EXT_OUT_LEN)];
@@ -55,6 +56,7 @@  efx_mcdi_init_rxq(
 	uint64_t addr;
 	efx_rc_t rc;
 	uint32_t dma_mode;
+	boolean_t want_outer_classes;
 
 	/* If this changes, then the payload size might need to change. */
 	EFSYS_ASSERT3U(MC_CMD_INIT_RXQ_OUT_LEN, ==, 0);
@@ -65,6 +67,25 @@  efx_mcdi_init_rxq(
 	else
 		dma_mode = MC_CMD_INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_SINGLE_PACKET;
 
+	if (encp->enc_tunnel_encapsulations_supported != 0) {
+		/*
+		 * WANT_OUTER_CLASSES can only be specified on hardware which
+		 * supports tunnel encapsulation offloads, even though it is
+		 * effectively the behaviour the hardware gives.
+		 *
+		 * Also, on hardware which does support such offloads, older
+		 * firmware rejects the flag if the offloads are not supported
+		 * by the current firmware variant, which means this may fail if
+		 * the capabilities are not updated when the firmware variant
+		 * changes. This is not an issue on newer firmware, as it was
+		 * changed in bug 69842 (v6.4.2.1007) to permit this flag to be
+		 * specified on all firmware variants.
+		 */
+		want_outer_classes = B_TRUE;
+	} else {
+		want_outer_classes = B_FALSE;
+	}
+
 	(void) memset(payload, 0, sizeof (payload));
 	req.emr_cmd = MC_CMD_INIT_RXQ;
 	req.emr_in_buf = payload;
@@ -76,7 +97,7 @@  efx_mcdi_init_rxq(
 	MCDI_IN_SET_DWORD(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_TARGET_EVQ, target_evq);
 	MCDI_IN_SET_DWORD(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_LABEL, label);
 	MCDI_IN_SET_DWORD(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_INSTANCE, instance);
-	MCDI_IN_POPULATE_DWORD_8(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAGS,
+	MCDI_IN_POPULATE_DWORD_9(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAGS,
 	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAG_BUFF_MODE, 0,
 	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAG_HDR_SPLIT, 0,
 	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAG_TIMESTAMP, 0,
@@ -85,7 +106,8 @@  efx_mcdi_init_rxq(
 	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAG_DISABLE_SCATTER, disable_scatter,
 	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_DMA_MODE,
 	    dma_mode,
-	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_PACKED_STREAM_BUFF_SIZE, ps_bufsize);
+	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_PACKED_STREAM_BUFF_SIZE, ps_bufsize,
+	    INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_FLAG_WANT_OUTER_CLASSES, want_outer_classes);
 	MCDI_IN_SET_DWORD(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_OWNER_ID, 0);
 	MCDI_IN_SET_DWORD(req, INIT_RXQ_EXT_IN_PORT_ID, EVB_PORT_ID_ASSIGNED);