From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed API refactoring Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 10:35:46 +0100 Message-ID: <3250488.B81B9g3x6N@xps13> References: <1457992546-32230-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E032113DB@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Marc , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Zhang, Helin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Glynn, Michael J" To: "Xu, Qian Q" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C62047D1 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 10:37:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id u125so13999726wmg.1 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 02:37:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E032113DB@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Is there someone investigating the issue? I think it should be simple to fix for someone mastering these Intel dr= ivers. 2016-03-25 01:02, Xu, Qian Q: > Marc > #Test1 is just a simple test. Just launch testpmd with these nic port= . > ./testpmd =E2=80=93c 0x3 =E2=80=93n 4 -- -i >=20 > Thanks > Qian >=20 > From: marc.sune@gmail.com [mailto:marc.sune@gmail.com] On Behalf Of M= arc > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 3:48 PM > 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 A= PI refactoring >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 24 March 2016 at 07:21, Xu, Qian Q > wrote: > Marc > I didn=E2=80=99t quite get your points, I observed that after applyin= g this patchset, all intel nic can=E2=80=99t be started, maybe somethin= g 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. >=20 > Is this test#1 one of the tests contained in the DPDK repository or i= s it an internal test? >=20 > Marc >=20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks > Qian >=20 > From: marc.sune@gmail.com [mailto:marc.su= ne@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 >=20 > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed A= PI refactoring >=20 > Qian, >=20 > On 23 March 2016 at 02:18, Xu, Qian Q > 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. Pleas= e check and fix it. >=20 >=20 > Thanks > Qian >=20 > -----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, Bruc= e; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/8] ethdev: 100G and link speed A= PI refactoring >=20 > 2016-03-17 19:08, Thomas Monjalon: > > 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. >=20 > Any feedback about autoneg in e1000/ixgbe/i40e? > Has it been tested before its integration in RC2? >=20 > > 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! >=20 >=20 > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Xu, Qian Q" > > To: "Cao, Waterman" >, "Glynn, Michael J" > > Cc: "Richardson, Bruce" >, "Zhu, Heqing" >, "O'Driscoll, Tim" >, "Mcnamara, John" >, "Xu, HuilongX" >, "Fu, JingguoX" >, "Xu, Qian Q" >, "Zhang, Helin" > > 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 rig= ht. > 2. Test the auto-negoation on major Intel NICs to ensure it's working= . > Nic covered: ixgbe, igb, i40e, fm10k, bonding(SW), virtio(SW) >=20 > When we run the Test#1 for all major NICs. We found that all these NI= C port(igb, ixgbe, i40e, fm10k) can't be started. Pls check, if the pat= ch is applied, all INTEL port can't be start, terrible things! >=20 > Interactive-mode selected > Configuring Port 0 (socket 0) > PMD: ixgbe_dev_tx_queue_setup(): sw_ring=3D0x7f13e99e3440 hw_ring=3D0= x7f13e99e5480 dma_addr=3D0x8299e5480 > 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=3D0x7f13ffcb8080 sw_sc_ring=3D= 0x7f13ffcbaac0 hw_ring=3D0x7f13e99d3380 dma_addr=3D0x8299d3380 > PMD: ixgbe_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 0; autonegotiati= on disabled > Fail to start port 0 > Configuring Port 1 (socket 0) > PMD: i40e_set_tx_function_flag(): Vector tx can be enabled on this tx= q. > PMD: i40e_dev_rx_queue_setup(): Rx Burst Bulk Alloc Preconditions are= satisfied. Rx Burst Bulk Alloc function will be used on port=3D1, queu= e=3D0. > PMD: i40e_dev_start(): Invalid link_speeds for port 1; autonegotiatio= n disabled >=20 >=20 > Just to double-check; is the test#1 adapted to the _new_ API that eth= dev has to set link speeds? For the output it seems autoneg is disabled= =3D> fixed speed, hence the new bitmaps have to be used. >=20 > (I am not claiming patchset is bug free; there might be issues still)= >=20 > Regards > marc >=20 > Fail to start port 1 > Please stop the ports first > Done >=20 > Thanks > Qian >=20 >=20 > -----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 >=20 > Hi Mike, >=20 > 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. >=20 > Waterman >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Glynn, Michael J > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:31 AM > To: Cao, Waterman > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce >; Zhu, Heqing >; O'Driscoll, Tim >; Mcnamara, John > > Subject: FW: DPDK link speed with Intel devices > Importance: High >=20 > Hi Waterman, all >=20 > See below - are you aware? And if so where are we with testing/resolu= tion? >=20 > Regards > Mike >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 2:19 PM > To: O'Driscoll, Tim >; Glynn, Michael J >; Zhu, Heqing > > Cc: vincent.jardin@6wind.com > Subject: DPDK link speed with Intel devices >=20 > Hi, >=20 > We are still waiting for test feedbacks for this important patchset: > ethdev: 100G and link speed API refactoring It is possible th= at it breaks the autonegotiation in e1000/ixgbe/i40e. >=20 > Thanks for taking care. >=20 >=20