[PATCH v6] net/i40e: rework maximum frame size configuration

[Kevin Traynor]

On 27/02/2023 00:35, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
> 

Hi Simei/Qi/Yu

> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Su, Simei <simei.su at intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2023 4:00 PM
>> To: Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>; Zhang, Yuying
>> <yuying.zhang at intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>;
>> david.marchand at redhat.com
>> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang at intel.com>; Su, Simei
>> <simei.su at intel.com>; stable at dpdk.org
>> Subject: [PATCH v6] net/i40e: rework maximum frame size configuration
>>
>> One issue is reported by David Marchand that error occurs in OVS due to the
>> fix patch in mentioned changes below. The detailed reproduce step and
>> result are in https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/
>> 20211207085946.121032-1-dapengx.yu at intel.com/.
>>
>> This patch removes unnecessary link status check and directly sets mac config
>> in dev_start. Also, it sets the parameter "wait to complete" true to wait for
>> more time to make sure adminq command execute completed.
>>

>> Fixes: a4ba77367923 ("net/i40e: enable maximum frame size at port level")
>> Fixes: 2184f7cdeeaa ("net/i40e: fix max frame size config at port level")
>> Fixes: 719469f13b11 ("net/i40e: fix jumbo frame Rx with X722")
>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org

These patches caused an observable regression in multiple 20.11 and 
21.11 LTS releases that was only caught a long time after releases.

Is there anything being added to LTS validation for regression testing 
this issue, so we don't get caught again?

After reverting the original patch and 2 fixes, I'm a bit reluctant to 
take more fixes without some form of regression testing in place.

thanks,
Kevin.

>>
>> Reported-by: David Marchand <david.marchand at redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Simei Su <simei.su at intel.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
> 
> Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel.
> 
> Thanks
> Qi
>