On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 06:34:47PM +0800, Lang Cheng wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/3/9 23:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 05:22:17PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> > > From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Minimum depth of qp should be allowed to be set to 0 according to the
> > > firmware configuration. And when qp is changed from reset to reset, the
> > > capability of minimum qp depth was used to identify hardware of hip06,
> > > it should be changed into a more readable form.
> >
> >
> > And what does it mean "qp depth == 0"?
>
>
> Here are 2 related test cases can be executed successfully:
> 1,Just create qp with 0-depth sq and 0-depth rq, but do not perform sending
> and receiving.
> 2. Create a qp with 0-depth rq, the send operation can be completed.
>
> Perhaps supporting 0-depth qp would provide some flexibility for some
> features.
>
> Or should we return error when ULP try to create a 0-depth queue?
"0" looks like not valid value and you can't explain what will be expected
behavior if user sets such value, so returning an error sounds like a
good solution.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c | 13 ++++++-------
> > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > > index 2a75355..10c4354 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > > @@ -382,10 +382,10 @@ static int set_rq_size(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev,
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - if (hr_dev->caps.min_wqes)
> > > + if (cap->max_recv_wr)
> > > max_cnt = max(cap->max_recv_wr, hr_dev->caps.min_wqes);
> > > else
> > > - max_cnt = cap->max_recv_wr;
> > > + max_cnt = 0;
> >
> > It is basically the same thing: cap->max_recv_wr == 0.
>
> The current firmware has not specified the minimum depth of qp, resulting in
> hr_dev-> caps.min_wqes always being 0, the process will always go into the
> else branch, so there is no minimum depth check for qp.
>
> The firmware will support configuring the minimum depth of qp, so this patch
> checks all the use of this caps.
if (cap->max_recv_wr)
cap->max_recv_wr != 0
else
cap->max_recv_wr == 0
=> max_cnt = 0 and max_cnt = cap->max_recv_wr are the same
Thanks
>
> >
> > >
> > > hr_qp->rq.wqe_cnt = roundup_pow_of_two(max_cnt);
> > >
> > > @@ -652,10 +652,10 @@ static int set_kernel_sq_size(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev,
> > >
> > > hr_qp->sq.wqe_shift = ilog2(hr_dev->caps.max_sq_desc_sz);
> > >
> > > - if (hr_dev->caps.min_wqes)
> > > + if (cap->max_send_wr)
> > > max_cnt = max(cap->max_send_wr, hr_dev->caps.min_wqes);
> > > else
> > > - max_cnt = cap->max_send_wr;
> > > + max_cnt = 0;
> >
> > Ditto
> >
> > >
> > > hr_qp->sq.wqe_cnt = roundup_pow_of_two(max_cnt);
> > > if ((u32)hr_qp->sq.wqe_cnt > hr_dev->caps.max_wqes) {
> > > @@ -1394,11 +1394,10 @@ int hns_roce_modify_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp, struct ib_qp_attr *attr,
> > > goto out;
> > >
> > > if (cur_state == new_state && cur_state == IB_QPS_RESET) {
> > > - if (hr_dev->caps.min_wqes) {
> > > + if (hr_dev->hw_rev == HNS_ROCE_HW_VER1) {
> > > ret = -EPERM;
> > > ibdev_err(&hr_dev->ib_dev,
> > > - "cur_state=%d new_state=%d\n", cur_state,
> > > - new_state);
> > > + "Unsupport to modify qp from reset to reset\n");
> >
> > "RST2RST state is not supported\n"
>
> Will be modified in next, thanks.
>
>
> >
> > > } else {
> > > ret = 0;
> > > }
> > > --
> > > 2.8.1
> > >
> >
> > .
> >
>
