Re: [PATCH] ethdev: fix push new event

["lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2480 bytes --]


在 2022/5/23 22:36, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 23/05/2022 11:51, David Marchand:
>> On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 8:57 AM Min Hu (Connor)<humin29@huawei.com>  wrote:
>>> From: Huisong Li<lihuisong@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> The 'state' in struct rte_eth_dev may be used to update some information
>>> when app receive these events. For example, when app receives a new event,
>>> app may get the socket id of this port by calling rte_eth_dev_socket_id to
>>> setup the attached port. The 'state' is used in rte_eth_dev_socket_id.
>>>
>>> If the state isn't modified to RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED before pushing the new
>>> event, app will get the socket id failed. So this patch moves pushing event
>>> operation after the state updated.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 99a2dd955fba ("lib: remove librte_ prefix from directory names")
>> A patch moving code is unlikely to be at fault.
>>
>>
>> Looking at the patch which moved those notifications in this point of
>> the code, the state update was pushed after the notification on
>> purpose.
>> See be8cd210379a ("ethdev: fix port probing notification")
>>
>>      ethdev: fix port probing notification
>>
>>      The new device was notified as soon as it was allocated.
>>      It leads to use a device which is not yet initialized.
>>
>>      The notification must be published after the initialization is done
>>      by the PMD, but before the state is changed, in order to let
>>      notified entities taking ownership before general availability.
>>
>>
>> Do we need an intermediate state during probing?
> Possibly. Currently we have only 3 states:
> 	RTE_ETH_DEV_UNUSED
> 	RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED
> 	RTE_ETH_DEV_REMOVED
>
> We may add RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED just before calling
> 	rte_eth_dev_callback_process(dev, RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW, NULL);
> Then we would need to check against RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED
> in some ethdev functions.
>
Hi, Thomas,

Do you mean that we need to modify some funcions like following?

int rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(uint16_t port_id)
{
     if (port_id >= RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS ||
         (rte_eth_devices[port_id].state != *RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED*))
         return 0;
     else
         return 1;
}

uint16_t rte_eth_find_next(uint16_t port_id)
{
     while (port_id < RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS &&
             rte_eth_devices[port_id].state != *RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED*)
         port_id++;

     if (port_id >= RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS)
         return RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS;

     return port_id;
}
>
> .

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3483 bytes --]