Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device info
flat view
From: Ananyev, Konstantin <hidden>
Date: 2015-06-15 18:12:13
-----Original Message----- From: Wang, Liang-min Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:47 PM To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Ananyev, Konstantin Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 9:46 AM To: Wang, Liang-min; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Wang, Liang-min Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 2:26 PM To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Ananyev, Konstantin Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 8:31 AM To: Wang, Liang-min; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Wang, Liang-min Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 10:51 PM To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Ananyev, Konstantin Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:07 AM To: Wang, Liang-min; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device infoquoted
-----Original Message----- From: Wang, Liang-min Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 1:58 PM To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device info Hi Konstantin,quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Ananyev, Konstantin Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:26 AM To: Wang, Liang-min; dev@dpdk.org Cc: Wang, Liang-min Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device info Hi Larry,quoted
-----Original Message----- From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Liang-Min Larry Wang Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 4:10 PM To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: Wang, Liang-min Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add apis to support access device info add new apis: - rte_eth_dev_default_mac_addr_set - rte_eth_dev_reg_leng - rte_eth_dev_reg_info - rte_eth_dev_eeprom_leng - rte_eth_dev_get_eeprom - rte_eth_dev_set_eeprom - rte_eth_dev_get_ringparam - rte_eth_dev_set_ringparam to enable reading device parameters (mac-addr, register, eeprom, ring) based upon ethtool alike data parameter specification. Signed-off-by: Liang-Min Larry Wang [off-list ref] --- lib/librte_ether/Makefile | 1 + lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_dev_info.h | 80+++++++++++++++++quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 159+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++quoted
lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 158++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++quoted
lib/librte_ether/rte_ether_version.map | 8 ++ 5 files changed, 406 insertions(+) create mode 100644 lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_dev_info.hdiff --git a/lib/librte_ether/Makefileb/lib/librte_ether/Makefile index c0e5768..05209e9 100644--- a/lib/librte_ether/Makefile +++ b/lib/librte_ether/Makefile@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ SRCS-y += rte_ethdev.cSYMLINK-y-include += rte_ether.h SYMLINK-y-include += rte_ethdev.h SYMLINK-y-include += rte_eth_ctrl.h +SYMLINK-y-include += rte_eth_dev_info.h # this lib depends upon: DEPDIRS-y += lib/librte_eal lib/librte_mempool lib/librte_ring lib/librte_mbuf diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_dev_info.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_dev_info.h new file mode 100644 index 0000000..002c4b5--- /dev/null +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_dev_info.h@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +/*- + * BSD LICENSE + * + * Copyright(c) 2015 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. + * All rights reserved. + * + * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with orwithoutquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * modification, are permitted provided that the followingconditionsquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * are met: + * + * * Redistributions of source code must retain the abovecopyrightquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. + * * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the abovecopyrightquoted
quoted
quoted
+ * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimerinquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * the documentation and/or other materials provided withthequoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * distribution. + * * Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names ofitsquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * contributors may be used to endorse or promoteproductsquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
derivedquoted
quoted
quoted
+ * from this software without specific prior writtenpermission.quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * + * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERSANDquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
CONTRIBUTORSquoted
+ * "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,INCLUDING,quoted
quoted
BUTquoted
quoted
NOTquoted
+ * LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OFMERCHANTABILITYquoted
quoted
ANDquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
FITNESS FORquoted
+ * A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENTSHALLquoted
quoted
THEquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
COPYRIGHTquoted
+ * OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT,INDIRECT,quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
INCIDENTAL,quoted
+ * SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES(INCLUDING,quoted
quoted
BUT NOTquoted
+ * LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS ORSERVICES;quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
LOSS OF USE,quoted
+ * DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)HOWEVERquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
CAUSEDquoted
quoted
AND ON ANYquoted
+ * THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICTLIABILITY,quoted
quoted
ORquoted
quoted
TORTquoted
+ * (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANYWAYquoted
quoted
OUTquoted
quoted
OF THE USEquoted
+ * OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITYOFquoted
quoted
SUCHquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
DAMAGE.quoted
+ */ + +#ifndef _RTE_ETH_DEV_INFO_H_ #define_RTE_ETH_DEV_INFO_H_quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ + +/* + * Placeholder for accessing device registers */ struct +rte_dev_reg_info { + void *buf; /**< Buffer for register */ + uint32_t offset; /**< Offset for 1st register to fetch */ + uint32_t leng; /**< Number of registers to fetch */ + uint32_t version; /**< Device version */ }; + +/* + * Placeholder for accessing device eeprom */ struct +rte_dev_eeprom_info { + void *buf; /**< Buffer for eeprom */ + uint32_t offset; /**< Offset for 1st eeprom location to +access*/quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ uint32_t leng; /**< Length of eeprom region to access */ + uint32_t magic; /**< Device ID */ }; + +/* + * Placeholder for accessing device ring parameters */ +struct rte_dev_ring_info { + uint32_t rx_pending; /**< Number of outstanding Rx ring */ + uint32_t tx_pending; /**< Number of outstanding Tx ring */ + uint32_t rx_max_pending; /**< Maximum number ofoutstandingquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+Rxring */quoted
+ uint32_t tx_max_pending; /**< Maximum number ofoutstandingquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+Txringquoted
+*/ }; + +/* + * A data structure captures information as defined in +struct ifla_vf_info + * for user-space api + */ +struct rte_dev_vf_info { + uint32_t vf; + uint8_t mac[ETHER_ADDR_LEN]; + uint32_t vlan; + uint32_t tx_rate; + uint32_t spoofchk; +};Wonder what that structure is for? I can't see it used in any function below?Good catch, this is designed for other ethtool ops that I did not include inthis release, I will remove this from next fix.quoted
quoted
quoted
+ +#endif /* _RTE_ETH_DEV_INFO_H_ */diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.cb/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c index 5a94654..186e85c 100644--- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c@@ -2751,6 +2751,32 @@rte_eth_dev_mac_addr_remove(uint8_tquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
port_id,quoted
struct ether_addr *addr) } int +rte_eth_dev_default_mac_addr_set(uint8_t port_id, struct +ether_addr +*addr) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + const int index = 0; + const uint32_t pool = 0; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id]; + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops-mac_addr_remove, -quoted
quoted
quoted
ENOTSUP);quoted
+ FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->mac_addr_add, -ENOTSUP);quoted
+ + /* Update NIC default MAC address*/ + (*dev->dev_ops->mac_addr_remove)(dev, index); + (*dev->dev_ops->mac_addr_add)(dev, addr, index, pool); + + /* Update default address in NIC data structure */ + ether_addr_copy(addr, &dev->data->mac_addrs[index]); + + return 0; +} + +int rte_eth_dev_set_vf_rxmode(uint8_t port_id, uint16_t vf, uint16_t rx_mode, uint8_t on) { @@-3627,3quoted
quoted
+3653,136 @@quoted
quoted
quoted
rte_eth_remove_tx_callback(uint8_t port_id,uint16_t queue_id,quoted
/* Callback wasn't found. */ return -EINVAL; } + +int +rte_eth_dev_reg_leng(uint8_t port_id) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->get_reg_length,-quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
ENOTSUP);quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->get_reg_length)(dev); +} + +int +rte_eth_dev_reg_info(uint8_t port_id, struct +rte_dev_reg_info +*info) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->get_reg, -ENOTSUP);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->get_reg)(dev, info); }Seems that *get_reg* stuff, will be really good addition for DPDK debugging abilities. Though, I'd suggest we change it a bit to make more generic andflexible:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Introduce rte_eth_reg_read/rte_eth_reg_write(), or probably even better rte_pcidev_reg_read /rte_pcidev_reg_write atEAL.quoted
quoted
Something similar to what port_pci_reg_read/port_pci_reg_write() are doing now at testpmd.h. struct rte_pcidev_reg_info { const char *name; uint32_t endianes, bar, offset, size, count; }; int rte_pcidev_reg_read(const struct rte_pci_device *, const struct rte_pcidev_reg_info *, uint64_t *reg_val); Then: int rte_eth_dev_get_reg_info(port_id, const struct rte_pcidev_reg_info **info); So each device would store in info a pointer to an array of it's register descriptions (finished by zero elem?). Then your ethtool (or any other upper layer) can do the following to read all device regs:The proposed reg info structure allows future improvement to supportindividual register read/write.quoted
Also, because each NIC device has a very distinguish registerdefinition.quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
So, the plan is to have more comprehensive interface to support query operation (for example, register name) before introduce individual/groupregister access.quoted
Points taken, the support will be in future release.Sorry, didn't get you. So you are ok to make these changes in next patch version?I would like to get a consensus from dpdk community on how to provideregister information. Well, that' ok, but if it is just a trial patch that is not intended to be applied, then you should mark it as RFC.quoted
Currently, it's designed for debug dumping. The register information is veryhardware dependent.quoted
Need to consider current supported NIC device and future devices forDPDK, so we won't make it a bulky interface. Ok, could you explain what exactly concerns you in the approach described above? What part you feel is bulky?quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
const struct rte_eth_dev_reg_info *reg_info; struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info; rte_eth_dev_info_get(pid, &dev_info); rte_eth_dev_get_reg_info(port_id, ®_info); for (i = 0; reg_info[i].name != NULL; i++) { ... rte_pcidev_read_reg(dev_info. pci_dev, reg_info[i], &v); .. }quoted
+ +int +rte_eth_dev_eeprom_leng(uint8_t port_id) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops-get_eeprom_length, -quoted
quoted
quoted
ENOTSUP);quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->get_eeprom_length)(dev); +} + +int +rte_eth_dev_get_eeprom(uint8_t port_id, struct +rte_dev_eeprom_info +*info) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->get_eeprom, -ENOTSUP);quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->get_eeprom)(dev, info); } + +int +rte_eth_dev_set_eeprom(uint8_t port_id, struct +rte_dev_eeprom_info +*info) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->set_eeprom, -ENOTSUP);quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->set_eeprom)(dev, info); } + +int +rte_eth_dev_get_ringparam(uint8_t port_id, struct +rte_dev_ring_info +*info) { + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; + + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port_id=%d\n",port_id);quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ return -ENODEV; + } + + if ((dev= &rte_eth_devices[port_id]) == NULL) { + PMD_DEBUG_TRACE("Invalid port device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->get_ringparam, -ENOTSUP);quoted
+ return (*dev->dev_ops->get_ringparam)(dev, info); }I think it will be a useful addition to the ethdev API to have an ability to retrieve current RX/TX queue parameters. Though again, it need to be more generic, so it could be useful for non- ethtool upper layer too. So I suggest to modify it a bit. Something like that: struct rte_eth_tx_queue_info { struct rte_eth_txconf txconf; uint32_t nb_tx_desc; uint32_t nb_max_tx_desc; /*max allowable TXDs for thatqueue */quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
uint32_t nb_tx_free; /* number of free TXDs at themomentquoted
quoted
ofquoted
quoted
call.quoted
quoted
*/ /* other tx queue data. */ }; int rte_etdev_get_tx_queue_info(portid, queue_id, struct rte_eth_tx_queue_info *qinfo) Then, your upper layer ethtool wrapper, can implement yours ethtool_get_ringparam() by: ... struct rte_eth_tx_queue_info qinfo; rte_ethdev_get_tx_queue_info(port, 0, &qinfo); ring_param->tx_pending = qinfo.nb_tx_desc - rte_eth_rx_queue_count(port, 0); Or probably even: ring_param->tx_pending = qinfo.nb_tx_desc - qinfo.nb_tx_free; Same for RX.For now, this descriptor ring information is used by the ethtool op. To make this interface simple, i.e. caller doesn't need to access otherqueue information. I just repeat what I said to you in off-line conversation: ethdev API is not equal ethtool API. It is ok to add a new function/structure to ethdev if it really needed, but we should do mechanical one to one copy. It is much better to add a function/structure that would be more generic, and suit other users, not only ethtool. There is no point to have dozen functions in rte_ethdev API providing similar information. BTW, I don't see how API I proposed is much more complex, then yoursone.quoted
The ring parameter is a run-time information which is different than datastructure described in this discussion. I don't see how they are different. Looking at ixgbe_get_ringparam(), it returns: rx_max_pending - that's a static IXGBE PMD value (max possible number of RXDs per one queue). rx_pending - number of RXD currently in use by the HW for queue 0 (that information can be changed at each call). With the approach I suggesting - you can get same information for each RX queue by calling rte_ethdev_get_rx_queue_info() and rte_eth_rx_queue_count(). Plus you are getting other RX queue data. Another thing - what is practical usage of the information you retrieving now by get_ringparam()? Let say it returned to you: rx_max_pending=4096; rx_pending=128; How that information would help to understand what is going on with thedevice?quoted
quoted
Without knowing value of nb_tx_desc for the queue, you can't say is you queue full or not. Again, it could be that all your traffic going through some other queue (not 0). So from my point rte_eth_dev_get_ringparam() usage is very limited, and doesn't provide enough information about current queue state. Same thing applies for TX.After careful review the suggestion in this comment, and review theexisting dpdk source code.quoted
I came to realize that neither rte_ethdev_get_rx_queue_info, rte_ethdev_get_tx_queue_info, struct rte_eth_rx_queue_info and struct rte_eth_tx_queue_info are available in the existing dpdk source code. Icould not make a patch based upon a set of non- existent API and data structure. Right now, in dpdk.org source code, struct rte_eth_dev_ring_info, struct rte_dev_eeprom_info and struct rte_dev_reg_info don't exist also. Same as all these functions: rte_eth_dev_default_mac_addr_set rte_eth_dev_reg_length rte_eth_dev_reg_info rte_eth_dev_eeprom_length rte_eth_dev_get_eeprom rte_eth_dev_set_eeprom rte_eth_dev_get_ringparam All this is a new API that's you are trying to add. But, by some reason you consider it is ok to add 'struct rte_eth_dev_ring_info', but couldn't add struct 'rte_ethdev_get_tx_queue_info' That just doesn't make any sense to me. In fact, I think our conversation is going in cycles. If you are not happy with the suggested approach, please provide some meaningful reason why.All the API's and data structure that you have questions in this comment are available from the submitted patch, you could run to see if it works. What I learned from your comments are a couple of API name and incomplete data structure description, so I could not make my patch according to your suggestion. If you strongly feel the API's that you are proposing are useful for get_ringparam(), please create a patch and submit it for evaluation.
Ok, I'll try to create a patch in next few days. Hopefully it will make things clearer to you and fit everyone. Konstantin
As coded in this patch, it's a simple and clean interface and most important, it can be validated and it works.quoted
Konstantinquoted
quoted
quoted
It's the desire of this patch to separate each data structure to avoid crossdependency. That's too cryptic to me. Could you explain what cross dependency you are talking about? Konstantin