On 24 March 2016 at 07:21, Xu, Qian Q [off-list ref] wrote:

Marc

I didn’t quite get your points, I observed that after applying this
patchset, all intel nic can’t be started, maybe something wrong happened
when you check the duplex/autoneg value for different NICs. If we want to
merge the patchset in RC2, we need fix them. Maybe not an easy job in
several days.

Is this test#1 one of the tests contained in the DPDK repository or is it
an internal test?

Marc

Thanks

Qian



*From:* marc.sune@gmail.com [mailto:marc.sune@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *
Marc
*Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2016 4:54 AM
*To:* Xu, Qian Q
*Cc:* Thomas Monjalon; Ananyev, Konstantin; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin;
Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org

*Subject:* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed API
refactoring



Qian,



On 23 March 2016 at 02:18, Xu, Qian Q [off-list ref] wrote:

We have tested with intel nic and found port can't be started for all
nics:ixgbe/i40e/igb/bonding, see attached mail for more details. Please
check and fix it.


Thanks
Qian


-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 3:59 AM
To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin
Cc: marcdevel@gmail.com; Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed API
refactoring

2016-03-17 19:08, Thomas Monjalon:

quoted

There are still too few tests and reviews, especially for
autonegotiation with Intel devices (patch #6).
I would not be surprised to see some bugs in this rework.

Any feedback about autoneg in e1000/ixgbe/i40e?
Has it been tested before its integration in RC2?

quoted

The capabilities must be adapted per device. It can be improved in a
separate patch.

It will be integrated in 16.04-rc2.
Please test and review shortly, thanks!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Xu, Qian Q" <redacted>
To: "Cao, Waterman" <redacted>, "Glynn, Michael J" <
michael.j.glynn@intel.com>
Cc: "Richardson, Bruce" <redacted>, "Zhu, Heqing" <
heqing.zhu@intel.com>, "O'Driscoll, Tim" [off-list ref],
"Mcnamara, John" [off-list ref], "Xu, HuilongX" <
huilongx.xu@intel.com>, "Fu, JingguoX" [off-list ref], "Xu, Qian
Q" [off-list ref], "Zhang, Helin" [off-list ref]
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 06:41:37 +0000
Subject: RE: DPDK link speed with Intel devices
Hi, all
We have worked out the basic test cases for the patchset.
1. Test the link speed on major Intel NICs to see if the speed is right.
2. Test the auto-negoation on major Intel NICs to ensure it's working.
Nic covered: ixgbe, igb, i40e, fm10k, bonding(SW), virtio(SW)

When we run the Test#1 for all major NICs. We found that all these NIC
port(igb, ixgbe, i40e, fm10k) can't be started. Pls check, if the patch is
applied, all INTEL port can't be start, terrible things!

Interactive-mode selected
Configuring Port 0 (socket 0)
PMD: ixgbe_dev_tx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=0x7f13e99e3440
hw_ring=0x7f13e99e5480 dma_addr=0x8299e5480
PMD: ixgbe_set_tx_function(): Using simple tx code path
PMD: ixgbe_set_tx_function(): Vector tx enabled.
PMD: ixgbe_dev_rx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=0x7f13ffcb8080
sw_sc_ring=0x7f13ffcbaac0 hw_ring=0x7f13e99d3380 dma_addr=0x8299d3380
PMD: ixgbe_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 0; autonegotiation
disabled
Fail to start port 0
Configuring Port 1 (socket 0)
PMD: i40e_set_tx_function_flag(): Vector tx can be enabled on this txq.
PMD: i40e_dev_rx_queue_setup(): Rx Burst Bulk Alloc Preconditions are
satisfied. Rx Burst Bulk Alloc function will be used on port=1, queue=0.
PMD: i40e_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 1; autonegotiation
disabled





Just to double-check; is the test#1 adapted to the _new_ API that ethdev
has to set link speeds? For the output it seems autoneg is disabled =>
fixed speed, hence the new bitmaps have to be used.



(I am not claiming patchset is bug free; there might be issues still)



Regards

marc



Fail to start port 1
Please stop the ports first
Done

Thanks
Qian


-----Original Message-----
From: Cao, Waterman
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 11:06 AM
To: Glynn, Michael J
Cc: Richardson, Bruce; Zhu, Heqing; O'Driscoll, Tim; Mcnamara, John; Xu,
Qian Q; Cao, Waterman
Subject: RE: DPDK link speed with Intel devices

Hi Mike,

        We just knew this patch set last week.
        Since this patch set is required to test with a lot of NIC,  we
need more document from Dev about this patch.
        Currently, Qian is working on with Wenzhuo on it now.

Waterman


-----Original Message-----
From: Glynn, Michael J
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:31 AM
To: Cao, Waterman <redacted>
Cc: Richardson, Bruce <redacted>; Zhu, Heqing <
heqing.zhu@intel.com>; O'Driscoll, Tim [off-list ref];
Mcnamara, John [off-list ref]
Subject: FW: DPDK link speed with Intel devices
Importance: High

Hi Waterman, all

See below - are you aware? And if so where are we with testing/resolution?

Regards
Mike



-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 2:19 PM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <redacted>; Glynn, Michael J <
michael.j.glynn@intel.com>; Zhu, Heqing [off-list ref]
Cc: vincent.jardin@6wind.com
Subject: DPDK link speed with Intel devices

Hi,

We are still waiting for test feedbacks for this important patchset:
        ethdev: 100G and link speed API refactoring It is possible that it
breaks the autonegotiation in e1000/ixgbe/i40e.

Thanks for taking care.