Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

[Thomas Monjalon]

+Cc dev@dpdk.org

2017-03-13 15:29, Thomas Monjalon:
> Hi i40e developers,
> 
> Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the
> same regardless of the PF driver:
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> "
> > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF 
> > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF 
> > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> [...]
> > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > There is some test activities ongoing.
> "
> 
> I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and
> i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> "
>     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
>     if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) {
> "
> 
> Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour
> as with a DPDK PF?
> 
> At least, it must be documented in
> 	doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini
> and marked as partially supported (P instead of Y) in
> 	doc/guides/nics/i40e.rst

Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

[Wu, Jingjing]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 7:35 AM
> To: Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Chen, Jing D <jing.d.chen@intel.com>
> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; vincent.jardin@6wind.com;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF
> 
> +Cc dev@dpdk.org
> 
> 2017-03-13 15:29, Thomas Monjalon:
> > Hi i40e developers,
> >
> > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the
> > same regardless of the PF driver:
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> > "
> > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF
> > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF
> > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> > [...]
> > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > > There is some test activities ongoing.
> > "
> >
> > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and
> > i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> > "
> >     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
> >     if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { "
> >
> > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour
> > as with a DPDK PF?
> >

As I know, VFD features are marked with an "EXPERIMENTAL" tag.
And we are working on the extendable interface (feature based) with
PF kernel driver. 

Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

[Thomas Monjalon]

2017-03-14 04:44, Wu, Jingjing:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > > Hi i40e developers,
> > >
> > > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the
> > > same regardless of the PF driver:
> > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> > > "
> > > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF
> > > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF
> > > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> > > [...]
> > > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > > > There is some test activities ongoing.
> > > "
> > >
> > > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> > > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and
> > > i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> > > "
> > >     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
> > >     if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { "
> > >
> > > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour
> > > as with a DPDK PF?
> > >
> 
> As I know, VFD features are marked with an "EXPERIMENTAL" tag.
> And we are working on the extendable interface (feature based) with
> PF kernel driver. 

The VLAN offload is not a VFD feature. It is a basic driver feature.
It is said that it is supported in the documentation but it is not
with a Linux PF.

Please consider the rest of my email:

> > At least, it must be documented in
> >       doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini
> > and marked as partially supported (P instead of Y) in
> >       doc/guides/nics/i40e.rst

Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

[Chen, Jing D]

> 
> +Cc dev@dpdk.org
> 
> 2017-03-13 15:29, Thomas Monjalon:
> > Hi i40e developers,
> >
> > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the
> > same regardless of the PF driver:
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> > "
> > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF
> > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF
> > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> > [...]
> > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > > There is some test activities ongoing.
> > "
> >
> > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and
> > i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> > "
> >     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
> >     if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { "
> >
> > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour
> > as with a DPDK PF?
> >
> > At least, it must be documented in
> > 	doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini
> > and marked as partially supported (P instead of Y) in
> > 	doc/guides/nics/i40e.rst

Thanks for pointing it out. We'll sync our code with latest kernel driver and
document and comment properly soon.

Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF

[Wu, Jingjing]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:31 AM
> To: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> Cc: Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>; Chen, Jing D
> <jing.d.chen@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>;
> vincent.jardin@6wind.com; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF
> 
> 2017-03-14 04:44, Wu, Jingjing:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > > > Hi i40e developers,
> > > >
> > > > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were
> > > > the same regardless of the PF driver:
> > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> > > > "
> > > > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > > > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > > > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > > > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF
> > > > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > > > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF
> > > > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> > > > [...]
> > > > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > > > > There is some test activities ongoing.
> > > > "
> > > >
> > > > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> > > > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set()
> > > > and i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> > > > "
> > > >     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
> > > >     if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { "
> > > >
> > > > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same
> > > > behaviour as with a DPDK PF?
> > > >
> >
> > As I know, VFD features are marked with an "EXPERIMENTAL" tag.
> > And we are working on the extendable interface (feature based) with PF
> > kernel driver.
> 
> The VLAN offload is not a VFD feature. It is a basic driver feature.
> It is said that it is supported in the documentation but it is not with a Linux PF.
> 
> Please consider the rest of my email:
> 
Yes, I was saying VLAN offload. What we are working to make VF and PF sync
based on feature ability but not whether it is DPDK PF or Kernel PF.

And, about the doc, yes, we need to add such limitation here.

Thanks
Jingjing
> > > At least, it must be documented in
> > >       doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini
> > > and marked as partially supported (P instead of Y) in
> > >       doc/guides/nics/i40e.rst