On 11/2/20 10:56 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 02:46:40PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:38:19AM -0800, Adit Ranadive wrote: >>> On 11/2/20 10:27 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:21:21AM -0800, Adit Ranadive wrote: >>>>> On 11/2/20 10:02 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 09:55:25AM -0800, Adit Ranadive wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/29/20 9:16 AM, Adit Ranadive wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10/29/20 4:57 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:19:45PM +0000, Adit Ranadive wrote: >>>>>>>>>> The PVRDMA device still reports the active_speed in u8. >>>>>>>>>> Lets use the ib_eth_get_speed to report the speed and >>>>>>>>>> width. Unfortunately, phys_state gets stored as msb of >>>>>>>>>> the new u16 active_speed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This explanation is not clear, I have no idea what this is fixing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seemed more clear to me in my head, I guess :). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> After commit 376ceb31ff87 changed the active_speed attribute to >>>>>>>> u16, both the active_speed and phys_state attributes in the >>>>>>>> pvrdma_port_attr struct are getting stored in this u16. As a >>>>>>>> result, these show up as invalid values in ibv_devinfo. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Our device still gives us back a u8 active_speed so both these >>>>>>>> are getting stored in the u16. This fix I proposed simply gets >>>>>>>> the active_speed from the netdev while the phys_state still >>>>>>>> needs to come from the pvrdma device, i.e. the msb the of the >>>>>>>> u16. I also removed some unused functions as a result. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alternatively, I could change the u8 active_width and u16 >>>>>>>> active_speed to reserved now that we're getting the active_speed >>>>>>>> and active_width from the ib_get_eth_speed function. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jason, did you have any comments on this or did you want me >>>>>>> to just send v1 with an updated description? >>>>>> >>>>>> I still haven't figured out what this is fixing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is 'struct pvrdma_port_attr' some kind of ABI? If so why isn't the fix >>>>>> to revert the type? >>>>> >>>>> I can revert it but I thought that it had to a u16 based on the IBTA, no? >>>>> Or does that not apply to device-level stuff? >>>> >>>> You didn't answer the question, it it ABI to some kind of FW interface >>>> or something? >>>> >>>> *HOW* did two fields get overlapped onto a single u16?? The compiler >>>> won't do this.. >>>> >>> >>> It is an ABI to the device for port attributes. The device gives us back >>> this structure for query port verb. The response from the device is >>> memcopied into this pvrdma_port_attr structure. So both the bytes >>> representing active_speed and phys_state from the device are copied >>> into the single u16 in this structure. >> >> So it is ABI and it shouldn't have been changed, point at the stuff >> that made it ABI and revert the structure layout change.. > > How will it work for the new IBTA speed? Hopefully that should be addressed in another patch I'll send out that uses the ib_get_eth_speed api? > > Thanks > >> >> Jason
