On 2020/3/10 20:39, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
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.
Check depth 0 in next.
Thanks.
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
.
.
