From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yuval Shaia Subject: Re: [PATCH ] mlx4_core: Enhance device capabilities flags debug printouts Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:25:03 +0200 Message-ID: <20141215122502.GA8027@yuval-lab> References: <1417996112-19060-1-git-send-email-yuval.shaia@oracle.com> <54881BFF.2030008@mellanox.com> <20141215092153.GF2806@yuval-lab> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Or Gerlitz Cc: Matan Barak , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:35:52AM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Yuval Shaia wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:10:07PM +0200, Matan Barak wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 12/8/2014 1:48 AM, Yuval Shaia wrote: > >> >1. Add indication whether feature is supported or not. > >> >2. Add descriptions of all features. > >> >Without this fix there is no way to tell if feature is not supported or that description is not exist. > >> > > >> >Signed-off-by: Yuval Shaia > >> >--- > >> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/fw.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >> > 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >> > > >> >diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/fw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/fw.c > >> >index 2e88a23..79ab326 100644 > >> >--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/fw.c > >> >+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/fw.c > >> >@@ -91,7 +91,10 @@ static void dump_dev_cap_flags(struct mlx4_dev *dev, u64 flags) > >> > [ 8] =P_Key violation counter", > >> > [ 9] =Q_Key violation counter", > >> > [10] =VMM", > >> >+ [11] =Fibre Channel Protocol On Ethernet Ports support", > >> > [12] =Dual Port Different Protocol (DPDP) support", > >> >+ [13] =Raw Ethertype support", > >> >+ [14] =Raw IPv6 support", > >> > [15] =Big LSO headers", > >> > [16] =MW support", > >> > [17] =APM support", > >> >@@ -99,16 +102,40 @@ static void dump_dev_cap_flags(struct mlx4_dev *dev, u64 flags) > >> > [19] =Raw multicast support", > >> > [20] =Address vector port checking support", > >> > [21] =UD multicast support", > >> >+ [22] =UD IPv4 Multicast support", > >> > [24] =Demand paging support", > >> > [25] =Router support", > >> >+ [26] =L2 Ethernet Multicast support", > >> >+ [28] =Software parsing support for UD transport", > >> >+ [29] =TCP checksum off-load support", > >> > [30] =IBoE support", > >> >+ [31] =FCoE T11 frame format support", > >> > [32] =Unicast loopback support", > >> >+ [33] =Multicast loopback support", > >> > [34] =FCS header control", > >> >+ [35] =Address Path ud_force_mgid support", > >> >+ [36] =Header-Data Split support", > >> >+ [37] =Wake On LAN support on port 1", > >> >+ [38] =Wake On LAN support on port 2", > >> >+ [39] =Fatal Warning Event upon a thermal warning condition", > >> > [38] =Wake On LAN support", > >> > [40] =UDP RSS support", > >> > [41] =Unicast VEP steering support", > >> > [42] =Multicast VEP steering support", > >> >+ [43] =VLAN Steering mechanism support", > >> >+ [44] =Steering according to EtherType support", > >> >+ [45] =WQE format version 1 support", > >> >+ [46] =Keep Alive Validiation support", > >> >+ [47] =PTP1588 support", > >> > [48] =Counters support", > >> >+ [49] =Advanced Counters support", > >> >+ [50] =Force Ethernet user priority from QPC support", > >> >+ [51] =RX Port Num check disabled", > >> >+ [52] =RSS on fragmented IP datagram support", > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Except for Or's comments, [55] exists twice. Furthermore, please > >> move [56]-[57] to be after [55] =Port link type sensing support". > > Thanks, > > Will send a revise patch soon. > > By accepting this patch it is agreed that function will dump device capabilities flag and not the combination of dev & driver capabilities. > > (as the name suggest) > > NO, as Matan wrote you "except for Or's comments" - we do want to dump Sure, was not ignoring this one, it was just a warn :) > what is supported by both the device (firmware) and the driver, and > not more. A subset of your patch can be used, let me know if you want > me to prepare it. Yes please do as i have no idea from where this info can be retrieved. How about the idea of maintaining drv_caps_flags field equivalent to dev_caps_flags? > > Or. > > >> > >> >+ [55] =Link Sensing support", > >> >+ [56] =Reliable Multicast support", > >> >+ [57] =Fast Drop support", > >> >+ [58] =Protected FMR support", > >> > [53] =Port ETS Scheduler support", > >> > [55] =Port link type sensing support", > >> > [59] =Port management change event support", > >> >@@ -119,8 +146,9 @@ static void dump_dev_cap_flags(struct mlx4_dev *dev, u64 flags) > >> > > >> > mlx4_dbg(dev, "DEV_CAP flags:\n"); > >> > for (i =; i < ARRAY_SIZE(fname); ++i) > >> >- if (fname[i] && (flags & (1LL << i))) > >> >- mlx4_dbg(dev, " %s\n", fname[i]); > >> >+ if (fname[i]) > >> >+ mlx4_dbg(dev, " (%c) %s\n", (flags & (1LL << i)) ? > >> >+ '*' : ' ', fname[i]); > >> > } > >> > >> I think that the strings should be displayed only if both driver and > >> FW supports them. You could add a QUERY_DEV_CAP_SUPPORTED_FLAGS > >> which ors all the supported flags in device.h and check if (flags & > >> QUERY_DEV_CAP_SUPPORTED_FLAGS) & (1LL << i)). > >> > >> > > >> > static void dump_dev_cap_flags2(struct mlx4_dev *dev, u64 flags) > >> >@@ -144,8 +172,9 @@ static void dump_dev_cap_flags2(struct mlx4_dev *dev, u64 flags) > >> > int i; > >> > > >> > for (i =; i < ARRAY_SIZE(fname); ++i) > >> >- if (fname[i] && (flags & (1LL << i))) > >> >- mlx4_dbg(dev, " %s\n", fname[i]); > >> >+ if (fname[i]) > >> >+ mlx4_dbg(dev, " (%c) %s\n", (flags & (1LL << i)) ? > >> >+ '*' : ' ', fname[i]); > >> > } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html