Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[CMIS] Add lane_mask parameter to set_loopback_mode() to enable setti… #490

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 8, 2024

Conversation

xinyulin
Copy link
Contributor

@xinyulin xinyulin commented Aug 5, 2024

Description

This commit introduces two additional input parameters, lane_mask and enable, to the set_loopback_mode() function. By specifying lane_mask, users can enable or disable the loopback mode on individual lanes rather than applying it to the entire physical port

Motivation and Context

Previously, the set_loopback_mode() function affected all lanes of a physical port simultaneously, limiting flexibility. By adding the lane_mask parameter, this update allows callers to target specific lanes, thereby enabling more precise testing, debugging, and configuration of network equipment.

How Has This Been Tested?

Only the corresponding lanes of the logical port will be manipulated with the newly updated sfputil debug loopback command.
image

Test log for the following reject cases:loopback_error_case_test_log.txt

  • Simultaneous host media loopback is not supported
  • Host/media output loopback is not supported
  • Per-lane/host host loopback is not supported

…ng loopback mode for individual lanes rather than the entire physical port

Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@mihirpat1 mihirpat1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin Can we have a check to ensure that for modules which do not support SimultaneousHostAndMediaSideLoopbacks (13h, Byte 128, bit 6), this API rejects such config wherein caller is trying to configure simultaneous host and media side loopbacks?

1. "none" (default)
2. "host-side-input"
3. "host-side-output"
4. "media-side-input"
5. "media-side-output"
lane_mask: A bitmask representing which lanes to apply the loopback mode to.
The default value of 0xFF indicates that the mode should be applied to all lanes.

The function will look at 13h:128 to check advertized loopback capabilities.
Return True if the provision succeeds, False if it fails
'''
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin As part of clearing the loopback (line 1136-1140), can we make sure that the loopback is cleared only for the lane_mask lanes rather than all lanes?
Also, should we check if the module advertises per lane loopback support and then use lane_mask accordingly. This will be helpful to clear loopback on all lanes if per lane loopback is not supported.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xinyulin xinyulin Aug 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. Sure! we'd better to reject the request if simultaneous host media loopback mode is not supported.
  2. To clear specific lanes corresponding to the logical port for the none mode, we will need to have two lane masks (host_lane_mask and media_lane_mask for host and media individually) because the host and media lane masks might not be identical (e.g., host_lane_mask = 0x3, media_lane_mask = 0x1).
  3. If per-lane loopback mode is not supported, should we reject the request or configure the entire physical port instead?
  4. Do you think it is useful to log some messages for the reject cases?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin
For 2., we can expect loopback_mode to include the type of loopback to be cleared i.e. have host-side-input-none, host-side-output-none etc. In this case, the caller can pass the lane_mask accordingly.
For 3., I think we should configure entire physical port and display a message. @prgeor Can you please confirm the expected behavior in this case?
For 4., Yes, I think it is helpful to log messages in reject cases.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mihirpat1 Thanks for the comments. I've updated it accordingly. Let's check if Prince has any comments on the changes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin I discussed with @prgeor regarding 3. and concluded to reject the config if per lane loopback is not supported (i.e. we should not configure unrelated lanes when loopback is intended to configure specific lanes).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mihirpat1 Thanks for the confirmation. It has been updated!

@xinyulin xinyulin force-pushed the set_loopback_mode branch 8 times, most recently from f339ec3 to a65614b Compare August 18, 2024 12:35
Copy link
Contributor

@mihirpat1 mihirpat1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin Can you please attach an error log showing that simultaneous loopback is not supported when loopback is performed on a module which does not support simultaneous host and media side loopback.

…pback modes and log errors for all rejection cases

Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
…a loopback is not supported or per-lane loopback is not supported

Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
@xinyulin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@xinyulin Can you please attach an error log showing that simultaneous loopback is not supported when loopback is performed on a module which does not support simultaneous host and media side loopback.

I have attached it in the PR description, it covers the various unsupported rejection cases. Please let me know if we need to provide more information or make it clearer to read

Comment on lines 1157 to 1203

if 'none' in loopback_mode:
if loopback_mode == 'none':
status_host_input = self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_INPUT_LOOPBACK, 0)
status_host_output = self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, 0)
status_media_input = self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_INPUT_LOOPBACK, 0)
status_media_output = self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, 0)
return all([status_host_input, status_host_output, status_media_input, status_media_output])

if loopback_mode == 'host-side-input-none':
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_INPUT_LOOPBACK, host_input_val & ~lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'host-side-output-none':
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, host_output_val & ~lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'media-side-input-none':
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_INPUT_LOOPBACK, media_input_val & ~lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'media-side-output-none':
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, media_output_val & ~lane_mask)
else:
return False
if loopback_capability['simultaneous_host_media_loopback_supported'] is False:
if any(['host' in loopback_mode and (media_input_val or media_output_val),
'media' in loopback_mode and (host_input_val or host_output_val)]):
txt = 'Simultaneous host media loopback is not supported\n'
txt += f'host_input_val:{host_input_val:02x}, host_output_val:{host_output_val:02x}, '
txt += f'media_input_val:{media_input_val:02x}, media_output_val:{media_output_val:02x}\n'
logger.error(txt)
return False

if loopback_mode == 'host-side-input' and host_input_support:
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_INPUT_LOOPBACK, host_input_val | lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'host-side-output' and host_output_support:
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.HOST_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, host_output_val | lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'media-side-input' and media_input_support:
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_INPUT_LOOPBACK, media_input_val | lane_mask)

if loopback_mode == 'media-side-output' and media_output_support:
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, media_output_val | lane_mask)

txt = f'Failed to set {loopback_mode} loopback, lane_mask:{lane_mask:02x}\n'
txt += f'host_input_support:{host_input_support}, host_output_support:{host_output_support}, '
txt += f'media_input_support:{media_input_support}, media_output_support:{media_output_support}\n'
txt += f'host_input_val:{host_input_val:02x}, host_output_val:{host_output_val:02x}, '
txt += f'media_input_val:{media_input_val:02x}, media_output_val:{media_output_val:02x}\n'
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mihirpat1 @xinyulin can we write 4 different functions
set_host_input_loopback()
set_host_ouput_loopback()
set_media_output_loopback()
set_media_input_loopback()

And use these functions to make code more readable

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@prgeor Yes, that would be much clearer to read. Do you think we should keep the set_loopback_mode() function since it has been there for years, or should we remove it and replace it with the four functions you proposed?

set_host_input_loopback(lane_mask, enable)
set_host_ouput_loopback(lane_mask, enable)
set_media_output_loopback(lane_mask, enable)
set_media_input_loopback(lane_mask, enable)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin

def set_loopback_mode(self, loopback_mode, lane_mask = 0xff):
    if (loopback_mode == host-side-ouput") :
            set_host_ouput_loopback(lane_mask, enable)
    else if  (loopback_mode == host-side-input") :
            set_host_input_loopback(lane_mask, enable)
   else if (loopback_mode == media-side-input") :
           set_media_output_loopback(lane_mask, enable)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@prgeor Thank you for the suggestions. It looks more clear and readable now.

…host, media, input, and output loopback modes

Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
else:
return self.xcvr_eeprom.write(consts.MEDIA_OUTPUT_LOOPBACK, media_output_val & ~lane_mask)

def set_loopback_mode(self, loopback_mode, lane_mask = 0xff):
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin can you add an argument enable to this function. Enable can be True or False.

Comment on lines 1289 to 1292
2. "host-side-input-none"
3. "host-side-output-none"
4. "media-side-input-none"
5. "media-side-output-none"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@xinyulin please see my comments below. if you add one argument enable we don't need "none"

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xinyulin xinyulin Sep 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@prgeor Yes, the enable input parameter has been added, and all loopback modes with the none suffix have been removed in the latest commit.
I've also updated the PR3485, could you please help me review it

prgeor
prgeor previously approved these changes Sep 2, 2024
@prgeor
Copy link
Collaborator

prgeor commented Sep 2, 2024

@mihirpat1 can you review?

…es with the -none suffix

Signed-off-by: xinyu <xinyu0123@gmail.com>
@prgeor prgeor merged commit ccea995 into sonic-net:master Sep 8, 2024
5 checks passed
@mihirpat1
Copy link
Contributor

@xinyulin Can you please help to cherry-pick this manually to 202311 branch since there is a merge conflict?
MSFT ADO - 28898451

@yxieca @prgeor for viz

@yxieca
Copy link
Contributor

yxieca commented Sep 10, 2024

@mihirpat1 @xinyulin please help raise 202311 PR. This RP cannot cherry-picked cleanly. Please test on 202311 branch before raising the PR. Thanks.

@xinyulin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mihirpat1 @yxieca PR #499 has been created and tested. Please review and merge it, thank you!

@xinyulin xinyulin deleted the set_loopback_mode branch September 12, 2024 04:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants