From: "Gaëtan Rivet" <grive@u256.net>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/3] net/ring: fix eth_dev device pointer on allocation
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 14:33:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200506123344.6ui6wfhwevawbyoh@u256.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e0b7fa05-0945-fa40-93ac-2929b4e89511@intel.com>
On 06/05/20 12:48 +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 5/5/2020 8:10 PM, Gaetan Rivet wrote:
> > When a net_ring device is allocated, its device pointer is not set
> > before calling rte_eth_dev_probing_finish, which is incorrect.
> >
> > The following:
> > commit: 96cb19521147 ("net/ring: use EAL APIs in PMD specific API")
> > commit: a6992e961050 ("net/ring: set ethernet device field")
> >
> > already attempted to fix this issue in 17.08, which was fine at the
> > time. Adding the hook rte_eth_dev_probing_finish() however created this
> > bug, as the eth_dev exposed when this hook is executed is expected to be
> > complete.
> >
> > Remove the prior attempts to fix the issue in rte_pmd_ring_probe() and
> > write the pointer properly in do_eth_dev_ring_create().
> >
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > Fixes: fbe90cdd776c ("ethdev: add probing finish function")
> > Cc: ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> > Cc: thomas@monjalon.net
> > Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <grive@u256.net>
>
> <...>
>
> > @@ -325,10 +346,17 @@ do_eth_dev_ring_create(const char *name,
> > data->kdrv = RTE_KDRV_NONE;
> > data->numa_node = numa_node;
> >
> > - /* finally assign rx and tx ops */
> > + /* assign rx and tx ops */
> > eth_dev->rx_pkt_burst = eth_ring_rx;
> > eth_dev->tx_pkt_burst = eth_ring_tx;
> >
> > + /* finally set the rte_device pointer in eth_dev. */
> > + eth_dev->device = ring_device_from_name(name);
> > + if (eth_dev->device == NULL) {
> > + rte_errno = ENODEV;
> > + goto error;
> > + }
> > +
> > rte_eth_dev_probing_finish(eth_dev);
> > *eth_dev_p = eth_dev;
>
> Why not move the 'rte_eth_dev_probing_finish()' to the 'rte_pmd_ring_probe()',
> below where 'eth_dev->device' set?
Hi Ferruh,
Sure it would work. The reason I did it this way is two-fold:
* I disliked having two places where eth_dev->device was conditionally
set. It makes it harder to read rte_pmd_ring_probe.
* I was actually thinking, doing this patch, that we should modify
rte_eth_dev_allocate() to take an rte_device as parameter, as all
eth_dev are meant to be backed by an rte_device. Keeping this in
mind, I meant to move writing the pointer closer to the
rte_eth_dev_allocate() call.
But you are right that it is needlessly verbose, using
vdev_bus->find_device() to do this stuff. I'm ok with changing it as you
described if you prefer.
--
Gaëtan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-06 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-27 10:44 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/failsafe: fix fd leak wangyunjian
2020-04-27 11:12 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-27 16:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-03 11:33 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-05-04 16:22 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-04 16:28 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-05-05 9:47 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-05-05 9:14 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-05-05 18:35 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-05 19:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/3] failsafe & ring fixes Gaetan Rivet
2020-05-05 19:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] net/failsafe: avoid crash on malformed eth_dev Gaetan Rivet
2020-05-06 17:16 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-05 19:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/3] net/ring: fix eth_dev device pointer on allocation Gaetan Rivet
2020-05-06 11:48 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-06 12:33 ` Gaëtan Rivet [this message]
2020-05-06 13:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-06 17:32 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-06 18:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Gaetan Rivet
2020-05-08 11:00 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-11 16:54 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-05 19:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/3] net/failsafe: fix default service proxy state Gaetan Rivet
2020-05-06 8:58 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-05-06 17:16 ` Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200506123344.6ui6wfhwevawbyoh@u256.net \
--to=grive@u256.net \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).