[PATCH v2 1/2] ethdev: add API to check queue ID validity

[huangdengdui]

On 2023/6/2 6:13, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 5/31/2023 5:31 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 5/22/2023 2:58 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>> On 5/22/23 16:09, Dengdui Huang wrote:
>>>> The API rte_eth_dev_is_valid_rxq/txq checks
>>>> the port ID validity and then the Rx/Tx queue ID is valid.
>>>
>>> What is valid Tx/Rx queue? It depends on on caller
>>> expectations. Some functions are satisfied with just
>>> check vs configured number of queues. Some require
>>> the queue to be setup. May be some should require
>>> the queue to be started.
>>>
>>> So, I suggest to avoid term "valid" and be more precise
>>> here and API naming.
>>>
>>
>> I understand the concern 'valid' keyword, but we already have an API as
>> 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port()', which does similar checks,
>>
>> so 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_rxq()' & 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_txq()' looks
>> consistent with it.
>>
>> v3 has API names, 'rte_eth_dev_rxq_avail()' & 'rte_eth_dev_txq_avail()',
>> I am not sure about these naming too, it feels like queues are valid but
>> it maybe in available and not available states.
>>
>>
>> @Andrew, do you have any suggestion on the API naming?
>> If not I am for going with rte_eth_dev_is_valid_rxq()' &
>> 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_txq()' mainly because of existing
>> 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port()' API.
>>
>> Perhaps we can elaborate what 'valid' means in API documentation to help
>> users.
>>
> 
> Hi Dengdui,
> 
> It looks like there is no better suggestion, lets not block this patch
> more and continue with
> 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_rxq()' & 'rte_eth_dev_is_valid_txq()' API names.
> 
> Can you please send a v4, with changes in v3 but API names as above, and
> more description in the API documentation for what 'valid' means?
> Hi Ferruh,
Thanks for your review, I will do in v4.
> 
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dengdui Huang <huangdengdui at huawei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst |  5 ++++
>>>>   lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c                | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h                | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   lib/ethdev/version.map                 |  4 +++
>>>>   4 files changed, 75 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst
>>>> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst
>>>> index a9b1293689..19e645156f 100644
>>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst
>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst
>>>> @@ -56,6 +56,11 @@ New Features
>>>>        =======================================================
>>>>     +* **Added ethdev Rx/Tx queue id check API.**
>>>> +
>>>> +  Added ethdev Rx/Tx queue id check API which provides functions
>>>
>>> id -> ID
>>>
>>>> +  for check if Rx/Tx queue id is valid.
>>>
>>> id -> ID
>>>
>>>> +
>>>
>>> It should be two empty lines here and just one above.
>>>
>>>>   Removed Items
>>>>   -------------
>>>>   diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>>>> index 4d03255683..3d85218127 100644
>>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>>>> @@ -407,6 +407,36 @@ rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(uint16_t port_id)
>>>>       return is_valid;
>>>>   }
>>>>   +int
>>>> +rte_eth_dev_is_valid_rxq(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t queue_id)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
>>>> +
>>>> +    RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
>>>> +    dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
>>>> +
>>>> +    if (queue_id >= dev->data->nb_rx_queues ||
>>>> +            dev->data->rx_queues[queue_id] == NULL)
>>>
>>> We already have internal eth_dev_validate_tx_queue(). Shouldn't
>>> it be used here?
>>>
>>> Also, some functions check that queues array is not NULL.
>>> If the the is excessive after queue number check, it
>>> should be consistent everywhere and corresponding check
>>> of the array pointer vs NULL should be removed in a separate
>>> cleanup patch. If the check is required in some corner cases
>>> (I hope no), it should be here as well.
>>>
>>>> +        return -EINVAL;
>>>> +
>>>> +    return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>
>