From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE543250 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 13:28:17 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2018 04:28:16 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,396,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="197562727" Received: from irsmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.23]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jan 2018 04:28:14 -0800 Received: from irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com (10.108.20.5) by IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:28:13 +0000 Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.236]) by irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.12]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:28:13 +0000 From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan_Rivet?= , Matan Azrad CC: Thomas Monjalon , "Wu, Jingjing" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Neil Horman , "Richardson, Bruce" Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3 7/7] app/testpmd: adjust ethdev port ownership Thread-Index: AQHTkHpyuUKMeuPQw06Oud7boKI8uKN7InaggAAFDoCAAAQmUIAACAgAgAAXyICABIDDwA== Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:28:12 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725886281B1D@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1515318351-4756-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> <1516293317-30748-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> <1516293317-30748-8-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725886280A68@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725886280AE8@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180119150017.mljpcdmldqx32mkq@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> In-Reply-To: <20180119150017.mljpcdmldqx32mkq@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiM2FhNDYyMmItMmJmMC00MThiLThlZmQtNmQ3MWQzMWQ2NDVlIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjUuOS4zIiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IjBXZ1lpdkdwNG9iZnc2SUtxOEZmVldEcTFmQjJTQUxkRnNoYjdaSFNXdkk9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 7/7] app/testpmd: adjust ethdev port ownership X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:28:18 -0000 Hi lads, >=20 > Hi Matan, >=20 > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 01:35:10PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote: > > Hi Konstantin > > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin, Friday, January 19, 2018 3:09 PM > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Matan Azrad [mailto:matan@mellanox.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:52 PM > > > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin ; Thomas > > > > Monjalon ; Gaetan Rivet > > > ; > > > > Wu, Jingjing > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Neil Horman ; Richardson, > > > > Bruce > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 7/7] app/testpmd: adjust ethdev port ownersh= ip > > > > > > > > Hi Konstantin > > > > > > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin, Friday, January 19, 2018 2:38 PM > > > > > To: Matan Azrad ; Thomas Monjalon > > > > > ; Gaetan Rivet ; > > > Wu, > > > > > Jingjing > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Neil Horman ; Richardson= , > > > > > Bruce > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 7/7] app/testpmd: adjust ethdev port > > > > > ownership > > > > > > > > > > Hi Matan, > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Matan Azrad [mailto:matan@mellanox.com] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 4:35 PM > > > > > > To: Thomas Monjalon ; Gaetan Rivet > > > > > > ; Wu, Jingjing > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Neil Horman ; > > > Richardson, > > > > > > Bruce ; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH v3 7/7] app/testpmd: adjust ethdev port ownersh= ip > > > > > > > > > > > > Testpmd should not use ethdev ports which are managed by other > > > > > > DPDK entities. > > > > > > > > > > > > Set Testpmd ownership to each port which is not used by other > > > > > > entity and prevent any usage of ethdev ports which are not owne= d by > > > Testpmd. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad > > > > > > --- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++----------= ------- > > > ---- > > > > > ----- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 2 +- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/config.c | 37 ++++++++++--------- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/parameters.c | 4 +- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++---------= --- > > > > > > app/test-pmd/testpmd.h | 3 ++ > > > > > > 6 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c in= dex > > > > > > 31919ba..6199c64 100644 > > > > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > > > > @@ -1394,7 +1394,7 @@ struct cmd_config_speed_all { > > > > > > &link_speed) < 0) > > > > > > return; > > > > > > > > > > > > - RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(pid) { > > > > > > + RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV_OWNED_BY(pid, my_owner.id) { > > > > > > > > > > Why do we need all these changes? > > > > > As I understand you changed definition of RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(), = so > > > > > no testpmd should work ok default (no_owner case). > > > > > Am I missing something here? > > > > > > > > Now, After Gaetan suggestion RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(pid) will iterate > > > over all valid and ownerless ports. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > Here Testpmd wants to iterate over its owned ports. > > > > > > Why? Why it can't just iterate over all valid and ownerless ports? > > > As I understand it would be enough to fix current problems and would = allow > > > us to avoid any changes in testmpd (which I think is a good thing). > > > > Yes, I understand that this big change is very daunted, But I think the= current a lot of bugs in testpmd(regarding port ownership) even more > daunted. > > > > Look, > > Testpmd initiates some of its internal databases depends on specific po= rt iteration, > > In some time someone may take ownership of Testpmd ports and testpmd wi= ll continue to touch them. But if someone will take the ownership (assign new owner_id) that port will= not appear in RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV() any more. > > >=20 > If I look back on the fail-safe, its sole purpose is to have seamless > hotplug with existing applications. >=20 > Port ownership is a genericization of some functions introduced by the > fail-safe, that could structure DPDK further. It should allow > applications to have a seamless integration with subsystems using port > ownership. Without this, port ownership cannot be used. >=20 > Testpmd should be fixed, but follow the most common design patterns of > DPDK applications. Going with port ownership seems like a paradigm > shift. >=20 > > In addition > > Using the old iterator in some places in testpmd will cause a race for = run-time new ports(can be created by failsafe or any hotplug code): > > - testpmd finds an ownerless port(just now created) by the old iterator= and start traffic there, > > - failsafe takes ownership of this new port and start traffic there. > > Problem! Could you shed a bit more light here - it would be race condition between w= hom and whom? As I remember in testpmd all control ops are done within one thread (main l= core). The only way to attach/detach port with it - invoke testpmd CLI "attach/det= ach" port. Konstantin >=20 > Testpmd does not handle detection of new port. If it did, testing > fail-safe with it would be wrong. >=20 > At startup, RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV already fixed the issue of registering > DEFERRED ports. There are still remaining issues regarding this, but I > think they should be fixed. The architecture does not need to be > completely moved to port ownership. >=20 > If anything, this should serve as a test for your API with common > applications. I think you'd prefer to know and debug with testpmd > instead of firing up VPP or something like that to determine what went > wrong with using the fail-safe. >=20 > > > > In addition > > As a good example for well-done application (free from ownership bugs) = I tried here to adjust Tespmd to the new rules and BTW to fix a > lot of bugs. >=20 > Testpmd has too much cruft, it won't ever be a good example of a > well-done application. >=20 > If you want to demonstrate ownership, I think you should start an > example application demonstrating race conditions and their mitigation. >=20 > I think that would be interesting for many DPDK users. >=20 > > > > > > So actually applications which are not aware to the port ownership stil= l are exposed to races, but if there use the old iterator(with the new > change) the amount of races decreases. > > > > Thanks, Matan. > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > > > > > I added to Testpmd ability to take an ownership of ports as the new > > > > ownership and synchronization rules suggested, Since Tespmd is a DP= DK > > > > entity which wants that no one will touch its owned ports, It must = allocate > > > an unique ID, set owner for its ports (see in main function) and reco= gnizes > > > them by its owner ID. > > > > > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > >=20 > Regards, > -- > Ga=EBtan Rivet > 6WIND