[v2,03/37] baseband/acc100: add function to check AQ availability

  It is possible for some corner case to run more batch enqueue than
supported. A protection is required to avoid that corner case.
Enhance all ACC100 enqueue operations with check to see if there is room
in the atomic queue for enqueueing batches into the queue manager
Check room in AQ for the enqueues batches into Qmgr

Signed-off-by: Hernan Vargas <hernan.vargas@intel.com>
---
 drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
  

On 8/20/22 04:31, Hernan Vargas wrote:
> It is possible for some corner case to run more batch enqueue than
> supported. A protection is required to avoid that corner case.
> Enhance all ACC100 enqueue operations with check to see if there is room
> in the atomic queue for enqueueing batches into the queue manager
> Check room in AQ for the enqueues batches into Qmgr

Same as on patch 2. Reading the commit message, it sounds like a fix.

> Signed-off-by: Hernan Vargas <hernan.vargas@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c b/drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c
> index 0598d33582..7349bb5bad 100644
> --- a/drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c
> +++ b/drivers/baseband/acc100/rte_acc100_pmd.c
> @@ -3635,12 +3635,27 @@ acc100_enqueue_enc_tb(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data,
>   	return i;
>   }
>   
> +/* Check room in AQ for the enqueues batches into Qmgr */
> +static int32_t
> +acc100_aq_avail(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data, uint16_t num_ops)
> +{
> +	struct acc100_queue *q = q_data->queue_private;
> +	int32_t aq_avail = q->aq_depth -
> +			((q->aq_enqueued - q->aq_dequeued +
> +			ACC100_MAX_QUEUE_DEPTH) % ACC100_MAX_QUEUE_DEPTH)
> +			- (num_ops >> 7);
> +	if (aq_avail <= 0)
> +		acc100_enqueue_queue_full(q_data);
Ok, forget my comment on patch 1, acc100_enqueue_queue_full() being used
here.

> +	return aq_avail;
> +}
> +
>   /* Enqueue encode operations for ACC100 device. */
>   static uint16_t
>   acc100_enqueue_enc(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data,
>   		struct rte_bbdev_enc_op **ops, uint16_t num)
>   {
> -	if (unlikely(num == 0))
> +	int32_t aq_avail = acc100_aq_avail(q_data, num);
> +	if (unlikely((aq_avail <= 0) || (num == 0)))
>   		return 0;
>   	if (ops[0]->turbo_enc.code_block_mode == RTE_BBDEV_TRANSPORT_BLOCK)
>   		return acc100_enqueue_enc_tb(q_data, ops, num);
> @@ -3653,7 +3668,8 @@ static uint16_t
>   acc100_enqueue_ldpc_enc(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data,
>   		struct rte_bbdev_enc_op **ops, uint16_t num)
>   {
> -	if (unlikely(num == 0))
> +	int32_t aq_avail = acc100_aq_avail(q_data, num);
> +	if (unlikely((aq_avail <= 0) || (num == 0)))
>   		return 0;
>   	if (ops[0]->ldpc_enc.code_block_mode == RTE_BBDEV_TRANSPORT_BLOCK)
>   		return acc100_enqueue_enc_tb(q_data, ops, num);
> @@ -3850,7 +3866,8 @@ static uint16_t
>   acc100_enqueue_dec(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data,
>   		struct rte_bbdev_dec_op **ops, uint16_t num)
>   {
> -	if (unlikely(num == 0))
> +	int32_t aq_avail = acc100_aq_avail(q_data, num);
> +	if (unlikely((aq_avail <= 0) || (num == 0)))
>   		return 0;
>   	if (ops[0]->turbo_dec.code_block_mode == RTE_BBDEV_TRANSPORT_BLOCK)
>   		return acc100_enqueue_dec_tb(q_data, ops, num);
> @@ -3863,11 +3880,8 @@ static uint16_t
>   acc100_enqueue_ldpc_dec(struct rte_bbdev_queue_data *q_data,
>   		struct rte_bbdev_dec_op **ops, uint16_t num)
>   {
> -	struct acc100_queue *q = q_data->queue_private;
> -	int32_t aq_avail = q->aq_depth +
> -			(q->aq_dequeued - q->aq_enqueued) / 128;
> -
> -	if (unlikely((aq_avail == 0) || (num == 0)))
> +	int32_t aq_avail = acc100_aq_avail(q_data, num);
> +	if (unlikely((aq_avail <= 0) || (num == 0)))
>   		return 0;
>   
>   	if (ops[0]->ldpc_dec.code_block_mode == RTE_BBDEV_TRANSPORT_BLOCK)