On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:20 PM Shoaib Rao <rao.shoaib@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 7/18/21 7:25 PM, Zhu Yanjun wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 7:00 AM Shoaib Rao <rao.shoaib@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Thanks for reporting the issue. I was able to reproduce the issue and > >> have fixed it. Kindly try gain. > > Do you make tests with rdma-core? > > > > IMHO, it is important to make tests with rdma-core before the commit > > is sent to the community. > > Yes I did. However the issue shows up only when I configure an interface > not just when module is loading. Anyways, my apologies. Thanks. In my test environment, it can pass rdma-core tests. But in this commit, a lot of default maximum values are changed. Not sure if this will cause other issues. Please wait for others' comments. Thank you Zhu Yanjun > > Shoaib > > > > > Zhu Yanjun > > > >> Regards, > >> > >> Shoaib > >> > >> > >> On 7/18/21 12:46 PM, Shoaib Rao wrote: > >>> Your urls are garbled, so I can not make any sense out of them. > >>> > >>> [root@ca-dev141 linux]# git remote --v > >>> origin > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!dGmB_LFQF6at31F0sVXbfyjtAlgNTWzBEaIER13mVG0ZAWBomLdmWXUe6DxoVFcz$ > >>> (fetch) > >>> origin > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!dGmB_LFQF6at31F0sVXbfyjtAlgNTWzBEaIER13mVG0ZAWBomLdmWXUe6DxoVFcz$ (push) > >>> > >>> [root@ca-dev141 linux]# git show 8c1b4316c3fa > >>> fatal: ambiguous argument '8c1b4316c3fa': unknown revision or path not > >>> in the working tree. > >>> > >>> [root@ca-dev141 linux]# git log --grep='RDMA/efa: Split hardware' > >>> [root@ca-dev141 linux]# > >>> > >>> [root@ca-dev141 linux]# git describe > >>> v5.14-rc1-17-gc06676b5953b > >>> > >>> You need to do a little bit more work on your end and tell me which > >>> value rxe is complaining about. Also provide a kernel version that you > >>> are using as I have provided above. > >>> > >>> Shoaib > >>> > >>> On 7/18/21 12:59 AM, Zhu Yanjun wrote: > >>>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 2:09 AM Shoaib Rao <rao.shoaib@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> On 7/15/21 9:07 PM, Zhu Yanjun wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 12:44 AM Shoaib Rao <rao.shoaib@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Following is a link > >>>>> > >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://marc.info/?l=linux-rdma&m=162395437604846&w=2__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!f9TPWtgUxambtSeQ_L3h-IH7CW3SifyiumB3kjc2v_w6Ec_WYVtjWyusEtgQ60iw$ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Or just search for my name in the archive. > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you see any issues with this value? > >>>>> > >>>>> After this commit is applied, I confronted the following problem > >>>>> " > >>>>> [ 639.943561] rdma_rxe: unloaded > >>>>> [ 679.717143] rdma_rxe: loaded > >>>>> [ 691.721055] rdma_rxe: not enough indices for max_elem > >>>>> " > >>>>> Not sure if this problem is introduced by this commit. Please help to > >>>>> check this problem. > >>>>> Thanks a lot. > >>>>> > >>>>> Zhu Yanjun > >>>>> > >>>>> I do not see the issue. > >>>>> > >>>>> [root@ca-dev66 rxe]# lsmod | grep rdma_rxe > >>>>> rdma_rxe 126976 0 > >>>>> ip6_udp_tunnel 16384 1 rdma_rxe > >>>>> udp_tunnel 20480 1 rdma_rxe > >>>>> ib_uverbs 147456 3 rdma_rxe,rdma_ucm,mlx5_ib > >>>>> ib_core 364544 10 > >>>>> rdma_cm,ib_ipoib,rdma_rxe,rds_rdma,iw_cm,ib_umad,rdma_ucm,ib_uverbs,mlx5_ib,ib_cm > >>>>> > >>>>> I am using gdb to dump the values > >>>>> > >>>>> (gdb) ptype RXE_MAX_INLINE_DATA > >>>>> type = enum rxe_device_param {RXE_MAX_MR_SIZE = -1, > >>>>> RXE_PAGE_SIZE_CAP = 4294963200, RXE_MAX_QP_WR = 1048576, > >>>>> RXE_DEVICE_CAP_FLAGS = 137466362998, RXE_MAX_SGE = 32, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_WQE_SIZE = 720, RXE_MAX_INLINE_DATA = 512, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SGE_RD = 32, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_CQ = 1048576, RXE_MAX_LOG_CQE = 15, RXE_MAX_PD = 1048576, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_QP_RD_ATOM = 128, RXE_MAX_RES_RD_ATOM = 258048, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_QP_INIT_RD_ATOM = 128, RXE_MAX_MCAST_GRP = 8192, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MCAST_QP_ATTACH = 56, RXE_MAX_TOT_MCAST_QP_ATTACH = > >>>>> 458752, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_AH = 1048576, RXE_MAX_SRQ_WR = 1048576, RXE_MIN_SRQ_WR > >>>>> = 1, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SRQ_SGE = 27, RXE_MIN_SRQ_SGE = 1, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_FMR_PAGE_LIST_LEN = 512, RXE_MAX_PKEYS = 64, > >>>>> RXE_LOCAL_CA_ACK_DELAY = 15, RXE_MAX_UCONTEXT = 1048576, > >>>>> RXE_NUM_PORT = 1, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_QP = 1048576, RXE_MIN_QP_INDEX = 16, RXE_MAX_QP_INDEX = > >>>>> 262144, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SRQ = 1048576, RXE_MIN_SRQ_INDEX = 131073, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SRQ_INDEX = 262144, RXE_MAX_MR = 1048576, RXE_MAX_MW = > >>>>> 4096, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_MR_INDEX = 1, RXE_MAX_MR_INDEX = 262144, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_MW_INDEX = 65537, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MW_INDEX = 131072, RXE_MAX_PKT_PER_ACK = 64, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_UNACKED_PSNS = 128, RXE_INFLIGHT_SKBS_PER_QP_HIGH = 64, > >>>>> RXE_INFLIGHT_SKBS_PER_QP_LOW = 16, RXE_NSEC_ARB_TIMER_DELAY = 200, > >>>>> RXE_VENDOR_ID = 16777215} > >>>>> > >>>>> It is possible that you are changing some values. > >>>> I git clone the source code from > >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rdma/rdma.git__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!efPsL9fikzm6Ob1-zsmbsAzPkfqRpxYkp9oJXF9csPOJgoei9njj8RmA5IyuH447$ > >>>> again. > >>>> And the first 3 commits are as below. One is your commit. > >>>> " > >>>> 6163ad3208c8 (HEAD -> for-next) RDMA/rxe: Bump up default maximum > >>>> values used via uverbs > >>>> 8c1b4316c3fa (origin/for-next, origin/HEAD) RDMA/efa: Split hardware > >>>> stats to device and port stats > >>>> 916071185b17 MAINTAINERS: Update maintainers of HiSilicon RoCE > >>>> " > >>>> > >>>> And when I tried to add a new rxe0, > >>>> " > >>>> error: Invalid argument > >>>> " > >>>> And the dmesg logs are as below: > >>>> > >>>> # dmesg > >>>> " > >>>> [ 70.782302] e1000: enp0s8 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, > >>>> Flow Control: RX > >>>> [ 70.782744] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): enp0s8: link becomes ready > >>>> [ 79.467652] rdma_rxe: loaded > >>>> [ 79.468348] rdma_rxe: not enough indices for max_elem > >>>> [ 79.468356] rdma_rxe: failed to add enp0s8 > >>>> " > >>>> > >>>> Please follow my steps to reproduce this problem again. > >>>> > >>>> Zhu Yanjun > >>>> > >>>>> Shoaib > >>>>> > >>>>> Shoaib > >>>>> > >>>>> On 7/14/21 10:02 PM, Zhu Yanjun wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 4:36 PM Rao Shoaib <Rao.Shoaib@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> From: Rao Shoaib <rshoaib@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> > >>>>> In our internal testing we have found that the > >>>>> current maximum are too smalls. Ideally there should > >>>>> be no limits but currently maximum values are reported > >>>>> via ibv_query_device, so we have to keep maximum values > >>>>> but they have been made suffiently large. > >>>>> > >>>>> Resubmitting after fixing an issue reported by test robot. > >>>>> > >>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rao Shoaib <rshoaib@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h | 26 > >>>>> ++++++++++++++------------ > >>>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h > >>>>> b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h > >>>>> index 742e6ec93686..092dbff890f2 100644 > >>>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h > >>>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h > >>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ > >>>>> > >>>>> #include <uapi/rdma/rdma_user_rxe.h> > >>>>> > >>>>> +#define DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE (1 << 20) > >>>>> > >>>>> Can you let me know the link in which the above value is discussed? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Zhu Yanjun > >>>>> > >>>>> + > >>>>> static inline enum ib_mtu rxe_mtu_int_to_enum(int mtu) > >>>>> { > >>>>> if (mtu < 256) > >>>>> @@ -37,7 +39,7 @@ static inline enum ib_mtu eth_mtu_int_to_enum(int > >>>>> mtu) > >>>>> enum rxe_device_param { > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MR_SIZE = -1ull, > >>>>> RXE_PAGE_SIZE_CAP = 0xfffff000, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_QP_WR = 0x4000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_QP_WR = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_DEVICE_CAP_FLAGS = IB_DEVICE_BAD_PKEY_CNTR > >>>>> | IB_DEVICE_BAD_QKEY_CNTR > >>>>> | IB_DEVICE_AUTO_PATH_MIG > >>>>> @@ -58,40 +60,40 @@ enum rxe_device_param { > >>>>> RXE_MAX_INLINE_DATA = RXE_MAX_WQE_SIZE - > >>>>> sizeof(struct > >>>>> rxe_send_wqe), > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SGE_RD = 32, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_CQ = 16384, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_CQ = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_LOG_CQE = 15, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_PD = 0x7ffc, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_PD = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_QP_RD_ATOM = 128, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_RES_RD_ATOM = 0x3f000, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_QP_INIT_RD_ATOM = 128, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MCAST_GRP = 8192, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MCAST_QP_ATTACH = 56, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_TOT_MCAST_QP_ATTACH = 0x70000, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_AH = 100, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_SRQ_WR = 0x4000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_AH = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_SRQ_WR = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_SRQ_WR = 1, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SRQ_SGE = 27, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_SRQ_SGE = 1, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_FMR_PAGE_LIST_LEN = 512, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_PKEYS = 1, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_PKEYS = 64, > >>>>> RXE_LOCAL_CA_ACK_DELAY = 15, > >>>>> > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_UCONTEXT = 512, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_UCONTEXT = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> > >>>>> RXE_NUM_PORT = 1, > >>>>> > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_QP = 0x10000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_QP = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_QP_INDEX = 16, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_QP_INDEX = 0x00020000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_QP_INDEX = 0x00040000, > >>>>> > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_SRQ = 0x00001000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_SRQ = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_SRQ_INDEX = 0x00020001, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_SRQ_INDEX = 0x00040000, > >>>>> > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_MR = 0x00001000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_MR = DEFAULT_MAX_VALUE, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MW = 0x00001000, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_MR_INDEX = 0x00000001, > >>>>> - RXE_MAX_MR_INDEX = 0x00010000, > >>>>> + RXE_MAX_MR_INDEX = 0x00040000, > >>>>> RXE_MIN_MW_INDEX = 0x00010001, > >>>>> RXE_MAX_MW_INDEX = 0x00020000, > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> 2.27.0 > >>>>>
