[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 14/15] ethdev: Support VFs on the different PCI domains
W dniu 10.10.2016 o 15:27, Ferruh Yigit pisze:
> On 10/10/2016 2:01 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>
>> W dniu 10.10.2016 o 12:19, Ferruh Yigit pisze:
>>> Hi Kamil,
>>>
>>> On 9/30/2016 1:05 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
It's possible to have the same numbers for bus, device id and function,
therefore we need to differentiate on domain.
This enables DPDK with multiple VFs on ThunderX 2-socket hardware.
Signed-off-by: Maciej Czekaj
Signed-off-by: Kamil Rytarowski
Signed-off-by: Zyta Szpak
Signed-off-by: Slawomir Rosek
Signed-off-by: Radoslaw Biernacki
Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob
---
lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
index 382c959..01d5fb0 100644
--- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
+++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_create_unique_device_name(char *name,
size_t size,
{
int ret;
- ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d.%d",
+ ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d:%d.%d", pci_dev->addr.domain,
pci_dev->addr.bus, pci_dev->addr.devid,
pci_dev->addr.function);
if (ret < 0)
>>> Is it possible to separate this patch from patchset, this is a ethdev
>>> patch and it seems not directly related to the rest of the patchset?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> ferruh
>> This patch is directly related with secondary queue set support on
>> ThunderX, but it can be skipped in this chain of patches and applied as
>> a standalone diff.
>>
>> Is disabling this one on patch work sufficient? Of course unless there
>> are no more comments to produce v3 of the original patch chain "Add
>> support for secondary queue set in nicvf thunderx driver".
> I think it is sufficient, at least I don't have any more comment for
> rest of the patchset and it looks good to me.
>
>> Should I resubmit it as a new standalone patch?
> Can you please resubmit just this one patch, so it can be properly reviewed.
>
> Thanks,
> ferruh
>
Hi,
I've performed the needed actions.
This patch should be disabled in the patch-chain and has been resent as
a new one.
[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 14/15] ethdev: Support VFs on the different PCI domains
W dniu 10.10.2016 o 12:19, Ferruh Yigit pisze:
> Hi Kamil,
>
> On 9/30/2016 1:05 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> It's possible to have the same numbers for bus, device id and function,
>> therefore we need to differentiate on domain.
>>
>> This enables DPDK with multiple VFs on ThunderX 2-socket hardware.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maciej Czekaj
>> Signed-off-by: Kamil Rytarowski
>> Signed-off-by: Zyta Szpak
>> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Rosek
>> Signed-off-by: Radoslaw Biernacki
>> Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob
>> ---
>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>> index 382c959..01d5fb0 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_create_unique_device_name(char *name, size_t
>> size,
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> -ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d.%d",
>> +ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d:%d.%d", pci_dev->addr.domain,
>> pci_dev->addr.bus, pci_dev->addr.devid,
>> pci_dev->addr.function);
>> if (ret < 0)
>>
> Is it possible to separate this patch from patchset, this is a ethdev
> patch and it seems not directly related to the rest of the patchset?
>
> Thanks,
> ferruh
This patch is directly related with secondary queue set support on
ThunderX, but it can be skipped in this chain of patches and applied as
a standalone diff.
Is disabling this one on patch work sufficient? Of course unless there
are no more comments to produce v3 of the original patch chain "Add
support for secondary queue set in nicvf thunderx driver".
Should I resubmit it as a new standalone patch?
[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 14/15] ethdev: Support VFs on the different PCI domains
On 10/10/2016 2:01 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>
>
> W dniu 10.10.2016 o 12:19, Ferruh Yigit pisze:
>> Hi Kamil,
>>
>> On 9/30/2016 1:05 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>> It's possible to have the same numbers for bus, device id and function,
>>> therefore we need to differentiate on domain.
>>>
>>> This enables DPDK with multiple VFs on ThunderX 2-socket hardware.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maciej Czekaj
>>> Signed-off-by: Kamil Rytarowski
>>> Signed-off-by: Zyta Szpak
>>> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Rosek
>>> Signed-off-by: Radoslaw Biernacki
>>> Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob
>>> ---
>>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>> index 382c959..01d5fb0 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_create_unique_device_name(char *name,
>>> size_t size,
>>> {
>>> int ret;
>>>
>>> - ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d.%d",
>>> + ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d:%d.%d", pci_dev->addr.domain,
>>> pci_dev->addr.bus, pci_dev->addr.devid,
>>> pci_dev->addr.function);
>>> if (ret < 0)
>>>
>> Is it possible to separate this patch from patchset, this is a ethdev
>> patch and it seems not directly related to the rest of the patchset?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ferruh
>
> This patch is directly related with secondary queue set support on
> ThunderX, but it can be skipped in this chain of patches and applied as
> a standalone diff.
>
> Is disabling this one on patch work sufficient? Of course unless there
> are no more comments to produce v3 of the original patch chain "Add
> support for secondary queue set in nicvf thunderx driver".
I think it is sufficient, at least I don't have any more comment for
rest of the patchset and it looks good to me.
>
> Should I resubmit it as a new standalone patch?
Can you please resubmit just this one patch, so it can be properly reviewed.
Thanks,
ferruh
[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 14/15] ethdev: Support VFs on the different PCI domains
Hi Kamil,
On 9/30/2016 1:05 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> It's possible to have the same numbers for bus, device id and function,
> therefore we need to differentiate on domain.
>
> This enables DPDK with multiple VFs on ThunderX 2-socket hardware.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej Czekaj
> Signed-off-by: Kamil Rytarowski
> Signed-off-by: Zyta Szpak
> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Rosek
> Signed-off-by: Radoslaw Biernacki
> Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob
> ---
> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
> index 382c959..01d5fb0 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_create_unique_device_name(char *name, size_t
> size,
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d.%d",
> + ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d:%d.%d", pci_dev->addr.domain,
> pci_dev->addr.bus, pci_dev->addr.devid,
> pci_dev->addr.function);
> if (ret < 0)
>
Is it possible to separate this patch from patchset, this is a ethdev
patch and it seems not directly related to the rest of the patchset?
Thanks,
ferruh
