* Re: [dpdk-stable] It there plan to queue this patch to stable release 19.11.9
2021-05-31 9:21 ` [dpdk-stable] It there plan to queue this patch to stable release 19.11.9 Christian Ehrhardt
@ 2021-05-31 10:00 ` Yu, DapengX
2021-05-31 15:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Yu, DapengX @ 2021-05-31 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Ehrhardt, Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: Yu, PingX, dpdk stable
Hi Christian,
My comments is inline.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2021 5:22 PM
> To: Yu, DapengX <dapengx.yu@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Cc: Yu, PingX <pingx.yu@intel.com>; dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
> Subject: Re: It there plan to queue this patch to stable release 19.11.9
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 5:13 AM Yu, DapengX <dapengx.yu@intel.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Christian,
> >
>
> Hi Dapeng
>
> > This patch:
> > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2021-March/029204.html
>
> This patch actually was never merged in the main branch On main we have:
>
> commit f93949c3afc39b0f610e0661f7baa21060ada13a
> Author: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@intel.com>
> net/ice: fix memory leak on dev closed
>
> This one also refers to bd513ece3c40 for a fix and was in 19.11 already.
> Then quite similar to what you referred to, but a more generic (all
> drivers) fix on the main branch
>
> commit 30410493759f4bae3f65497737661e27b93c2d0e
> Author: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> drivers/net: check process type in close operation See =>
> https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/commit/30410493759f4bae3f65497737661e2
> 7b93c2d0e
>
> This one was in 20.11 but not targeted for stable@dpdk.org
>
> The patch almost applies but since the change is mostly the same to all
> drivers it seems backportable.
>
> Maybe if you could sync with Thomas if this (general) solution is applicable
> and prepare the backport we can add it.
> It is close as I wanted to call for RC1 already, but if done soon it should be fine.
> I'll hold back 19.11.9-RC1 another day to give this a chance to be clarified until
> tomorrow.
>
> @Dapeng please talk to Thomas and consider providing a 19.11.9 backport of
> the fix that made it into the main branch.
[Dapeng Yu] The patch from Thomas can replace my patch and it is better solution, suggest merging Thomas's patch into 19.11.9
> @Thomas Monjalon was there a specific reason/prereq which made you not
> targeting stable@ with the fix?
>
> > Is prepared for ice NIC PMD on 19.11.7, but not be merged.
> >
> > Do you have plan to merge this patch in 19.11.9?
> >
> >
> >
> > Without this patch, if there are primary and secondary process use ice PMD
> at the same time, the processes may crash.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Dapeng Yu
> >
> >
> >
> > Note: the patch details:
> >
> >
> ==========================================================
> ==
> >
> > From: Dapeng Yu <dapengx.yu at intel.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > The secondary processes are not allowed to release shared resources.
> >
> > Only process-private resources should be freed in a secondary process.
> >
> > So the close operation is just forbidden in a secondary process.
> >
> >
> >
> > Fixes: bd513ece3c40 ("net/ice: release port upon close")
> >
> > Cc: stable at dpdk.org
> >
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dapeng Yu <dapengx.yu at intel.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > PATCH 19.11.7-rc1
> >
> >
> >
> > drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c | 3 +++
> >
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> > b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> >
> > index c2e659303c..2552bf228c 100644
> >
> > --- a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> >
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> >
> > @@ -2394,6 +2394,9 @@ ice_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> >
> > struct ice_adapter *ad =
> >
> >
> > ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_ADAPTER(dev->data->dev_private);
> >
> >
> >
> > + if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY)
> >
> > + return;
> >
> > +
> >
> > /* Since stop will make link down, then the link event
> > will be
> >
> > * triggered, disable the irq firstly to avoid the
> > port_infoe etc
> >
> > * resources deallocation causing the interrupt service
> > thread
> >
> > --
> >
> > 2.27.0
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Christian Ehrhardt
> Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
> Canonical Ltd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] It there plan to queue this patch to stable release 19.11.9
2021-05-31 9:21 ` [dpdk-stable] It there plan to queue this patch to stable release 19.11.9 Christian Ehrhardt
2021-05-31 10:00 ` Yu, DapengX
@ 2021-05-31 15:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-06-03 5:38 ` Christian Ehrhardt
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-05-31 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yu, DapengX, Christian Ehrhardt; +Cc: Yu, PingX, dpdk stable
31/05/2021 11:21, Christian Ehrhardt:
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 5:13 AM Yu, DapengX <dapengx.yu@intel.com> wrote:
> > This patch: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2021-March/029204.html
>
> This patch actually was never merged in the main branch
> On main we have:
>
> commit f93949c3afc39b0f610e0661f7baa21060ada13a
> Author: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@intel.com>
> net/ice: fix memory leak on dev closed
>
> This one also refers to bd513ece3c40 for a fix and was in 19.11 already.
> Then quite similar to what you referred to, but a more generic (all
> drivers) fix on the main branch
>
> commit 30410493759f4bae3f65497737661e27b93c2d0e
> Author: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> drivers/net: check process type in close operation
> See => https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/commit/30410493759f4bae3f65497737661e27b93c2d0e
>
> This one was in 20.11 but not targeted for stable@dpdk.org
>
> The patch almost applies but since the change is mostly the same to
> all drivers it seems backportable.
>
> Maybe if you could sync with Thomas if this (general) solution is
> applicable and prepare the backport we can add it.
> It is close as I wanted to call for RC1 already, but if done soon it
> should be fine.
> I'll hold back 19.11.9-RC1 another day to give this a chance to be
> clarified until tomorrow.
>
> @Dapeng please talk to Thomas and consider providing a 19.11.9
> backport of the fix that made it into the main branch.
> @Thomas Monjalon was there a specific reason/prereq which made you not
> targeting stable@ with the fix?
It was not considered as a fix but a behaviour improvement :)
I agree it could be backported.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread