[v5,5/5] net/sfc: report user flag on EF100 native datapath
Checks
Commit Message
Detect the flag in Rx prefix and pass it to users.
Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@xilinx.com>
---
drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
drivers/net/sfc/sfc_rx.c | 3 +++
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
Comments
On 10/5/2021 4:56 PM, Ivan Malov wrote:
> Detect the flag in Rx prefix and pass it to users.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@xilinx.com>
<...>
> @@ -407,6 +409,15 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
> ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_RSS_HASH);
> }
>
> + if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
> + uint32_t user_flag;
> +
> + user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
> + ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
> + if (user_flag != 0)
> + ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
> + }
> +
Hi Ivan,
This cause a build error after another sfc patch merged into next-net [1].
Following change [2] seems fixing the issue, but to be sure nothing is missed
can you please send a new version rebasing on top of latest next-net?
[1]
Commit d86c6ced8732 ("net/sfc: use xword type for EF100 Rx prefix")
[2]
diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
index 704c62c0ac90..8237b772f151 100644
--- a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
uint32_t user_flag;
- user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
+ user_flag = EFX_XWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
if (user_flag != 0)
ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
Hi Ferruh,
On 12/10/2021 21:08, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 10/5/2021 4:56 PM, Ivan Malov wrote:
>> Detect the flag in Rx prefix and pass it to users.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@xilinx.com>
>
> <...>
>
>> @@ -407,6 +409,15 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct
>> sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
>> ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_RSS_HASH);
>> }
>> + if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
>> + uint32_t user_flag;
>> +
>> + user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
>> + ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
>> + if (user_flag != 0)
>> + ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
>> + }
>> +
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> This cause a build error after another sfc patch merged into next-net [1].
> Following change [2] seems fixing the issue, but to be sure nothing is
> missed
> can you please send a new version rebasing on top of latest next-net?
Done. Thank you.
>
>
> [1]
> Commit d86c6ced8732 ("net/sfc: use xword type for EF100 Rx prefix")
>
> [2]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> index 704c62c0ac90..8237b772f151 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct
> sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
> if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
> uint32_t user_flag;
>
> - user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
> + user_flag = EFX_XWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
> ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
> if (user_flag != 0)
> ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
Hi Ferruh,
I apologise: there was a defect in v6. I re-submitted the series (v7):
https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=19571
Thank you.
On 12/10/2021 21:08, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 10/5/2021 4:56 PM, Ivan Malov wrote:
>> Detect the flag in Rx prefix and pass it to users.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@xilinx.com>
>
> <...>
>
>> @@ -407,6 +409,15 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct
>> sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
>> ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_RSS_HASH);
>> }
>> + if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
>> + uint32_t user_flag;
>> +
>> + user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
>> + ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
>> + if (user_flag != 0)
>> + ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
>> + }
>> +
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> This cause a build error after another sfc patch merged into next-net [1].
> Following change [2] seems fixing the issue, but to be sure nothing is
> missed
> can you please send a new version rebasing on top of latest next-net?
>
>
> [1]
> Commit d86c6ced8732 ("net/sfc: use xword type for EF100 Rx prefix")
>
> [2]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> index 704c62c0ac90..8237b772f151 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef100_rx.c
> @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct
> sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
> if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
> uint32_t user_flag;
>
> - user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
> + user_flag = EFX_XWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
> ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
> if (user_flag != 0)
> ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ struct sfc_ef100_rxq {
#define SFC_EF100_RXQ_RSS_HASH 0x10
#define SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_MARK 0x20
#define SFC_EF100_RXQ_FLAG_INTR_EN 0x40
+#define SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG 0x80
unsigned int ptr_mask;
unsigned int evq_phase_bit_shift;
unsigned int ready_pkts;
@@ -371,6 +372,7 @@ static const efx_rx_prefix_layout_t sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_layout = {
SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD(RSS_HASH_VALID, B_FALSE),
SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD(CLASS, B_FALSE),
SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD(RSS_HASH, B_FALSE),
+ SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD(USER_FLAG, B_FALSE),
SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD(USER_MARK, B_FALSE),
#undef SFC_EF100_RX_PREFIX_FIELD
@@ -407,6 +409,15 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_prefix_to_offloads(const struct sfc_ef100_rxq *rxq,
ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_RSS_HASH);
}
+ if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG) {
+ uint32_t user_flag;
+
+ user_flag = EFX_OWORD_FIELD(rx_prefix[0],
+ ESF_GZ_RX_PREFIX_USER_FLAG);
+ if (user_flag != 0)
+ ol_flags |= PKT_RX_FDIR;
+ }
+
if (rxq->flags & SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_MARK) {
uint32_t user_mark;
@@ -800,6 +811,12 @@ sfc_ef100_rx_qstart(struct sfc_dp_rxq *dp_rxq, unsigned int evq_read_ptr,
else
rxq->flags &= ~SFC_EF100_RXQ_RSS_HASH;
+ if ((unsup_rx_prefix_fields &
+ (1U << EFX_RX_PREFIX_FIELD_USER_FLAG)) == 0)
+ rxq->flags |= SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG;
+ else
+ rxq->flags &= ~SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_FLAG;
+
if ((unsup_rx_prefix_fields &
(1U << EFX_RX_PREFIX_FIELD_USER_MARK)) == 0)
rxq->flags |= SFC_EF100_RXQ_USER_MARK;
@@ -914,6 +931,7 @@ struct sfc_dp_rx sfc_ef100_rx = {
.hw_fw_caps = SFC_DP_HW_FW_CAP_EF100,
},
.features = SFC_DP_RX_FEAT_MULTI_PROCESS |
+ SFC_DP_RX_FEAT_FLOW_FLAG |
SFC_DP_RX_FEAT_FLOW_MARK |
SFC_DP_RX_FEAT_INTR,
.dev_offload_capa = 0,
@@ -1178,6 +1178,9 @@ sfc_rx_qinit(struct sfc_adapter *sa, sfc_sw_index_t sw_index,
if (offloads & DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH)
rxq_info->type_flags |= EFX_RXQ_FLAG_RSS_HASH;
+ if ((sa->negotiated_rx_metadata & RTE_ETH_RX_METADATA_USER_FLAG) != 0)
+ rxq_info->type_flags |= EFX_RXQ_FLAG_USER_FLAG;
+
if ((sa->negotiated_rx_metadata & RTE_ETH_RX_METADATA_USER_MARK) != 0)
rxq_info->type_flags |= EFX_RXQ_FLAG_USER_MARK;