Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] hinic: add support to query function table | From | "luobin (L)" <> | Date | Sat, 29 Aug 2020 08:44:11 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/8/29 1:19, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:16:22 +0800 luobin (L) wrote: >> On 2020/8/28 3:44, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 19:13:21 +0800 Luo bin wrote: >>>> + switch (idx) { >>>> + case VALID: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw0.bs.valid; >>>> + case RX_MODE: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw0.bs.nic_rx_mode; >>>> + case MTU: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw1.bs.mtu; >>>> + case VLAN_MODE: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw1.bs.vlan_mode; >>>> + case VLAN_ID: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw1.bs.vlan_id; >>>> + case RQ_DEPTH: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw13.bs.cfg_rq_depth; >>>> + case QUEUE_NUM: >>>> + return funcfg_table_elem->dw13.bs.cfg_q_num; >>> >>> The first two patches look fairly unobjectionable to me, but here the >>> information does not seem that driver-specific. What's vlan_mode, and >>> vlan_id in the context of PF? Why expose mtu, is it different than >>> netdev mtu? What's valid? rq_depth? >>> . >>> >> The vlan_mode and vlan_id in function table are provided for VF in QinQ scenario >> and they are useless for PF. Querying VF's function table is unsupported now, so >> there is no need to expose vlan_id and vlan mode and I'll remove them in my next >> patchset. The function table is saved in hw and we expose the mtu to ensure the >> mtu saved in hw is same with netdev mtu. The valid filed indicates whether this >> function is enabled or not and the hw can judge whether the RQ buffer in host is >> sufficient by comparing the values of rq depth, pi and ci. > > Queue depth is definitely something we can add to the ethtool API. > You already expose raw producer and consumer indexes so the calculation > can be done, anyway. > . > Okay, I'll remove the queue depth as well. Thanks for your review.
| |