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

[Su, Simei]

Hi Kevin,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor at redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 5:40 PM
> To: Jiang, YuX <yux.jiang at intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>; Su,
> Simei <simei.su at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>; Zhang,
> Yuying <yuying.zhang at intel.com>; david.marchand at redhat.com
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang at intel.com>; stable at dpdk.org;
> Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian.org>; Mcnamara, John
> <john.mcnamara at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] net/i40e: rework maximum frame size configuration
> 
> On 24/03/2023 06:32, Jiang, YuX wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor at redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 10:51 PM
> >> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>; Su, Simei
> >> <simei.su at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>; Zhang,
> >> Yuying <yuying.zhang at intel.com>; david.marchand at redhat.com; Jiang,
> >> YuX <yux.jiang at intel.com>
> >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang at intel.com>;
> >> stable at dpdk.org; Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian.org>; Mcnamara, John
> >> <john.mcnamara at intel.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] net/i40e: rework maximum frame size
> >> configuration
> >>
> >> On 22/03/2023 16:50, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> >>> On 27/02/2023 00:35, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Simei/Qi/Yu
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi 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?
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is the issue I was talking about earlier during the release
> >> meeting. Not sure if we were talking about the same patch.
> >>
> >> I was asking if there are some regression tests added/can be added to
> >> LTS validation that will be run during each LTS validation cycle so
> >> we don't have any more regressions on it.
> >>
> > Hi Kevin,
> > Thanks for your comments.
> > Yes. We are adding additional case to cover more testing. For main branch,
> we have done the regression testing (including the additional case testing),
> they both work well.
> 
> That's good to hear. Will the additional regression tests also be added to the
> LTS validation tests when they are run?
> 
> > We hope the two related patches can be backported to LTS branch, and the
> second patch just reworks for previous bug's fix.
> > 	Patch1:
> https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20221213091837.87953-1-d
> avid.marchand at redhat.com/	a8ca8ed net/i40e: revert link status check
> on device start
> 
> I have already reverted those 3 backports on 21.11 branch so this is not
> needed.
> 
> > 	Pathc2:
> https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230306121853.27547-1-s
> imei.su at intel.com/	82fcf20 net/i40e: fix maximum frame size
> configuration
> >
> 
> That is the v7 of this v6 with revert and fix split, so same one being discussed
> above.

The fix split is to rework and simplify code in previous bug fix patch for unexpected packets received issue.

Best Regards,
Simei

> 
> > Best regards,
> > Yu Jiang
> >
> >> thanks,
> >> Kevin.
> >>
> >>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>
> >