DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com>,
	Tetsuya Mukawa <mtetsuyah@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
	Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
	Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
	Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/null: fix multi-process rx and tx
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 17:00:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <91f5d30e-91ff-d6d4-3adb-a89af97ae6a0@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190929024141.30443-1-yasufum.o@gmail.com>

On 9/29/2019 3:41 AM, Yasufumi Ogawa wrote:
> Packet processing in secondary process cannot work because rx_pkt_burst
> and tx_pkt_burst in eth_dev are not initialized while probing device.
> This patch is to the initialization.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
> index 0c60d241a..5a2010e3e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
> @@ -586,6 +586,13 @@ rte_pmd_null_probe(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
>  		/* TODO: request info from primary to set up Rx and Tx */
>  		eth_dev->dev_ops = &ops;
>  		eth_dev->device = &dev->device;
> +		if (packet_copy) {
> +			eth_dev->rx_pkt_burst = eth_null_copy_rx;
> +			eth_dev->tx_pkt_burst = eth_null_copy_tx;
> +		} else {
> +			eth_dev->rx_pkt_burst = eth_null_rx;
> +			eth_dev->tx_pkt_burst = eth_null_tx;
> +		}
>  		rte_eth_dev_probing_finish(eth_dev);
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> 


Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>

But this seems the issue for other virtual PMDs too, @Yasufumi, can you please
check others too if you have any bandwidth for it?


I assume this is missing for a long time because there is not easy way to test
them in secondary process, testpmd doesn't support the multi process. cc'ed
testpmd and multi process maintainers, what do you think about adding multi
process support to testpmd?


I tested with "examples/multi_process/symmetric_mp" sample app, it required
fixing with null pmd:
1- Requested offload config was not supported by null pmd
2- promics_enable dev_ops was not implemented in null pmd

We should fix sample app / virtual pmds too so they can work together...

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-01 16:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-29  2:41 Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-10-01 16:00 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2019-10-01 16:03   ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-10-03  8:15   ` Yasufumi Ogawa

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=91f5d30e-91ff-d6d4-3adb-a89af97ae6a0@intel.com \
    --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=bernard.iremonger@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=mtetsuyah@gmail.com \
    --cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=yasufum.o@gmail.com \
    /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).