From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3B358CB
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:39:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20])
by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
30 Apr 2019 09:39:15 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,414,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="342200386"
Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.113])
([10.237.220.113])
by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2019 09:39:14 -0700
To: "Suanming.Mou" <mousuanming@huawei.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: vipin.varghese@intel.com
References: <1556595548-53745-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<1556624124-54930-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<1556624124-54930-2-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<655f3c30-b277-fad7-6a68-64dd70fd3601@intel.com>
<49788495-9412-972b-5500-9ff48b36eafe@huawei.com>
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Message-ID: <491c12ba-2cd8-e1bd-6622-0549439ecbc8@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:39:14 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <49788495-9412-972b-5500-9ff48b36eafe@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] app/pdump: add pudmp exits with primary
support.
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:39:17 -0000
On 30-Apr-19 12:25 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote:
>
> On 2019/4/30 17:42, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
>> On 30-Apr-19 12:35 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote:
>>> When primary app exits, the residual running pdump will stop the
>>> primary app to restart. Add pdump exits with primary support.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Varghese, Vipin <vipin.varghese@intel.com>
>>> Suggested-by: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Suanming.Mou <mousuanming@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> static void
>>> +disable_primary_monitor(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Don't worry about it is primary exit case. The alarm cancel
>>> + * function will take care about that. */
>>> + ret = rte_eal_alarm_cancel(monitor_primary, NULL);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + printf("Fail to disable monitor fail:%d\n", ret);
>>
>> Double fail :)
> Ah, yes, sorry for that the code gets worse. :(
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void
>>> signal_handler(int sig_num)
>>> {
>>> if (sig_num == SIGINT) {
>>> @@ -910,6 +936,19 @@ struct parse_val {
>>> ;
>>> }
>>> +static void
>>> +enable_primary_monitor(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Once primary exits, so will pdump. */
>>> + ret = rte_eal_alarm_set(MONITOR_INTERVAL, monitor_primary, NULL);
>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>> + cleanup_pdump_resources();
>>> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Fail to monitor primary:%d\n", ret);
>>> + }
>>
>> Why is this function void, when you could've called rte_exit() in the
>> caller on failure? And why is it such a fatal error to set up the
>> timer? IMO just a warning would've been enough.
>
> Here comes with two issues:
>
> Q1. The return value of the function:
>
> A1: I'm so sorry that it does not seem to make sense to check the
> function's return value. Does it mean if we change the timer set up from
> error to warning, then we can use the return value to judge if need to
> disable the primary_monitor?
>
> Q2. The choice when rte_eal_alarm_set fail:
>
> A2: OK, agree with that.
If this is non-fatal, no need to change anything - just print out a
warning instead of rte_exit, and no more changes needed here.
>
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> int
>>> main(int argc, char **argv)
>>> {
>>> @@ -950,11 +989,13 @@ struct parse_val {
>>> rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid argument\n");
>>> }
>>> - /* create mempool, ring and vdevs info */
>>> + /* create mempool, ring, vdevs info and primary monitor */
>>> create_mp_ring_vdev();
>>> enable_pdump();
>>> + enable_primary_monitor();
>>> dump_packets();
>>> + disable_primary_monitor();
>>> cleanup_pdump_resources();
>>> /* dump debug stats */
>>> print_pdump_stats();
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FCCA0679
for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:39:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35CAA5A6E;
Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:39:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3B358CB
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:39:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20])
by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
30 Apr 2019 09:39:15 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,414,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="342200386"
Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.113])
([10.237.220.113])
by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2019 09:39:14 -0700
To: "Suanming.Mou" <mousuanming@huawei.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: vipin.varghese@intel.com
References: <1556595548-53745-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<1556624124-54930-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<1556624124-54930-2-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com>
<655f3c30-b277-fad7-6a68-64dd70fd3601@intel.com>
<49788495-9412-972b-5500-9ff48b36eafe@huawei.com>
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Message-ID: <491c12ba-2cd8-e1bd-6622-0549439ecbc8@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:39:14 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <49788495-9412-972b-5500-9ff48b36eafe@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] app/pdump: add pudmp exits with primary
support.
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Message-ID: <20190430163914.7P6U94lAmT6dNUXevNxQDDFje_vqEJz-iu-GQqGtO7w@z>
On 30-Apr-19 12:25 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote:
>
> On 2019/4/30 17:42, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
>> On 30-Apr-19 12:35 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote:
>>> When primary app exits, the residual running pdump will stop the
>>> primary app to restart. Add pdump exits with primary support.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Varghese, Vipin <vipin.varghese@intel.com>
>>> Suggested-by: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Suanming.Mou <mousuanming@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> static void
>>> +disable_primary_monitor(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Don't worry about it is primary exit case. The alarm cancel
>>> + * function will take care about that. */
>>> + ret = rte_eal_alarm_cancel(monitor_primary, NULL);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + printf("Fail to disable monitor fail:%d\n", ret);
>>
>> Double fail :)
> Ah, yes, sorry for that the code gets worse. :(
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void
>>> signal_handler(int sig_num)
>>> {
>>> if (sig_num == SIGINT) {
>>> @@ -910,6 +936,19 @@ struct parse_val {
>>> ;
>>> }
>>> +static void
>>> +enable_primary_monitor(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Once primary exits, so will pdump. */
>>> + ret = rte_eal_alarm_set(MONITOR_INTERVAL, monitor_primary, NULL);
>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>> + cleanup_pdump_resources();
>>> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Fail to monitor primary:%d\n", ret);
>>> + }
>>
>> Why is this function void, when you could've called rte_exit() in the
>> caller on failure? And why is it such a fatal error to set up the
>> timer? IMO just a warning would've been enough.
>
> Here comes with two issues:
>
> Q1. The return value of the function:
>
> A1: I'm so sorry that it does not seem to make sense to check the
> function's return value. Does it mean if we change the timer set up from
> error to warning, then we can use the return value to judge if need to
> disable the primary_monitor?
>
> Q2. The choice when rte_eal_alarm_set fail:
>
> A2: OK, agree with that.
If this is non-fatal, no need to change anything - just print out a
warning instead of rte_exit, and no more changes needed here.
>
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> int
>>> main(int argc, char **argv)
>>> {
>>> @@ -950,11 +989,13 @@ struct parse_val {
>>> rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid argument\n");
>>> }
>>> - /* create mempool, ring and vdevs info */
>>> + /* create mempool, ring, vdevs info and primary monitor */
>>> create_mp_ring_vdev();
>>> enable_pdump();
>>> + enable_primary_monitor();
>>> dump_packets();
>>> + disable_primary_monitor();
>>> cleanup_pdump_resources();
>>> /* dump debug stats */
>>> print_pdump_stats();
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Thanks,
Anatoly