Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Maxime Coquelin]

Hi Christian,

On 12/2/21 14:45, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 5:56 PM <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi commit authors (and maintainers),
>>
>> Despite being selected by the DPDK maintenance tool ./devtools/git-log-fixes.sh
>> I didn't apply following commits from DPDK main to 19.11
>> stable branch, as conflicts or build errors occur.
>>
>> Can authors check your patches in the following list and either:
>>      - Backport your patches to the 19.11 branch, or
>>      - Indicate that the patch should not be backported
>>
>> Please do either of the above by December the 14th 2021 (More time than
>> usual as backports get harder).
> 
> Sorry, but to meet some deadlines by test/verification I need to reduce the
> time for backports to make it into -rc1 to the 9th of December.
> 
> That still is 7 days out from now and still longer than usual.
> 
> 
>> You can find the a temporary work-in-progress branch of the coming 19.11.11
>> release at:
>>      https://github.com/cpaelzer/dpdk-stable-queue
>> It is recommended to backport on top of that to minimize further conflicts or
>> misunderstandings.
>>
>> Some notes on stable backports:
>>
>> A backport should contain a reference to the DPDK main branch commit
>> in it's commit message in the following fashion:
>>      [ upstream commit <commit's dpdk main branch SHA-1 checksum> ]
>>
>> For example:
>>      https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk-stable/commit/?h=18.11&id=d90e6ae6f936ecdc2fd3811ff9f26aec7f3c06eb
>>
>> When sending the backported patch, please indicate the target branch in the
>> subject line, as we have multiple branches, for example:
>>      [PATCH 19.11] foo/bar: fix baz
>>
>> With git format-patch, this can be achieved by appending the parameter:
>>      --subject-prefix='PATCH 19.11'
>>
>> Send the backported patch to "stable@dpdk.org" but not "dev@dpdk.org".
>>
>> FYI, branch 19.11 is located at tree:
>>     https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk-stable
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
>>
>> ---
>>

...

>> b72099be7f  David Marchand   net/virtio-user: fix init when using existing tap
This commit should not be backported.
We deliberately omitted adding the Fixes tag and Cc'ing stable@dpdk.org
so that it is not automatically backported.

Regards,
Maxime

RE: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Ding, Xuan]

Hi Christian,

The two fix patches from mine aimed at DPDK version after 19.11. So they only need to be backported in 20.11.
04bcc80204  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix indirect descriptor reconnection
ad6f01945a  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix avail descriptor ID

Thanks for your reminder.

Regards,
Xuan

Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 9:18 PM Maxime Coquelin
<maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> On 12/2/21 14:45, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 5:56 PM <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi commit authors (and maintainers),
> >>
> >> Despite being selected by the DPDK maintenance tool ./devtools/git-log-fixes.sh
> >> I didn't apply following commits from DPDK main to 19.11
> >> stable branch, as conflicts or build errors occur.
> >>
> >> Can authors check your patches in the following list and either:
> >>      - Backport your patches to the 19.11 branch, or
> >>      - Indicate that the patch should not be backported
> >>
> >> Please do either of the above by December the 14th 2021 (More time than
> >> usual as backports get harder).
> >
> > Sorry, but to meet some deadlines by test/verification I need to reduce the
> > time for backports to make it into -rc1 to the 9th of December.
> >
> > That still is 7 days out from now and still longer than usual.
> >
> >
> >> You can find the a temporary work-in-progress branch of the coming 19.11.11
> >> release at:
> >>      https://github.com/cpaelzer/dpdk-stable-queue
> >> It is recommended to backport on top of that to minimize further conflicts or
> >> misunderstandings.
> >>
> >> Some notes on stable backports:
> >>
> >> A backport should contain a reference to the DPDK main branch commit
> >> in it's commit message in the following fashion:
> >>      [ upstream commit <commit's dpdk main branch SHA-1 checksum> ]
> >>
> >> For example:
> >>      https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk-stable/commit/?h=18.11&id=d90e6ae6f936ecdc2fd3811ff9f26aec7f3c06eb
> >>
> >> When sending the backported patch, please indicate the target branch in the
> >> subject line, as we have multiple branches, for example:
> >>      [PATCH 19.11] foo/bar: fix baz
> >>
> >> With git format-patch, this can be achieved by appending the parameter:
> >>      --subject-prefix='PATCH 19.11'
> >>
> >> Send the backported patch to "stable@dpdk.org" but not "dev@dpdk.org".
> >>
> >> FYI, branch 19.11 is located at tree:
> >>     https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk-stable
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
>
> ...
>
> >> b72099be7f  David Marchand   net/virtio-user: fix init when using existing tap
> This commit should not be backported.

Hi Maxime,
thanks for the info.

> We deliberately omitted adding the Fixes tag and Cc'ing stable@dpdk.org
> so that it is not automatically backported.

The tooling by default also picks up anything that has "fix" in the subject.
But I start realizing that nowadays the community is much better at
properly using "Fixes:" and "stable@".
And OTOH explaining the same to David just a few minutes ago makes me
feel that we should probably remove those kind of patches from the
automatic candidate list.

> Regards,
> Maxime
>


-- 
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:07 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> The two fix patches from mine aimed at DPDK version after 19.11. So they only need to be backported in 20.11.
> 04bcc80204  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix indirect descriptor reconnection
> ad6f01945a  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix avail descriptor ID

Thank you,
they both refer to fix a patch that in turn fixes issues that existed
before 19.11.
Hence they came into the candidate list.

For the second one you are right, this isn't present, but 04bcc80204
refers to fix 8c1df884.
And 8c1df884 is in 19.11.x as:

commit 8c1df8846b15bf87beee2907dd9ecb5d5adaca1d
Author: Marvin Liu <yong.liu@intel.com>
Date:   Mon Sep 28 16:20:51 2020 +0800

    net/virtio: fix packed ring indirect descricptors setup

    [ upstream commit 381f39ebb78a35d8dcc2d4500419644c7de5400f ]


So do we really not need/want it?

> Thanks for your reminder.
>
> Regards,
> Xuan


--
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

[PATCH 19.11] net/mlx5: fix Altivec Rx

[Xueming Li]

[ upstream commit 68fa62924de4fed4c241db9b7fcb58e66f62a2f9 ]

This patch fixes stale field reference.

Fixes: a18ac6113331 ("net/mlx5: add metadata support to Rx datapath")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
index acbc329674a..576bc627b7b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
@@ -808,10 +808,10 @@ rxq_burst_v(struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n,
 			(vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp1, cqe_sel_mask1);
 		cqe_tmp2 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
 			*(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
-			&cq[pos + p3].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
+			&cq[pos + p3].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
 		cqe_tmp1 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
 			*(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
-			&cq[pos + p2].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
+			&cq[pos + p2].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
 		cqes[3] = (vector unsigned char)
 			vec_sel((vector unsigned short)cqes[3],
 			(vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp2,
@@ -871,10 +871,10 @@ rxq_burst_v(struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n,
 			(vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp1, cqe_sel_mask1);
 		cqe_tmp2 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
 			*(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
-			&cq[pos + p1].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
+			&cq[pos + p1].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
 		cqe_tmp1 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
 			*(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
-			&cq[pos].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
+			&cq[pos].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
 		cqes[1] = (vector unsigned char)
 			vec_sel((vector unsigned short)cqes[1],
 			(vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp2, cqe_sel_mask2);
-- 
2.34.0

RE: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Ding, Xuan]

Hi Christian,

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
>Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 2:27 PM
>To: Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com>
>Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>Subject: Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11
>
>On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:07 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> The two fix patches from mine aimed at DPDK version after 19.11. So they
>only need to be backported in 20.11.
>> 04bcc80204  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix indirect descriptor reconnection
>> ad6f01945a  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix avail descriptor ID
>
>Thank you,
>they both refer to fix a patch that in turn fixes issues that existed before 19.11.
>Hence they came into the candidate list.
>
>For the second one you are right, this isn't present, but 04bcc80204 refers to
>fix 8c1df884.
>And 8c1df884 is in 19.11.x as:
>
>commit 8c1df8846b15bf87beee2907dd9ecb5d5adaca1d
>Author: Marvin Liu <yong.liu@intel.com>
>Date:   Mon Sep 28 16:20:51 2020 +0800
>
>    net/virtio: fix packed ring indirect descricptors setup
>
>    [ upstream commit 381f39ebb78a35d8dcc2d4500419644c7de5400f ]
>
>
>So do we really not need/want it?

Thanks for your confirmation.
For 04bcc80204, I will send out a patch.
BTW, ad6f01945a refers to b473061b0e1d ("net/virtio: fix indirect descriptors in packed datapaths").
Why hasn't this patch been backported in 19.11?

Regards,
Xuan

>
>> Thanks for your reminder.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Xuan
>
>
>--
>Christian Ehrhardt
>Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
>Canonical Ltd

Re: [PATCH 19.11] net/mlx5: fix Altivec Rx

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:59 AM Xueming Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> [ upstream commit 68fa62924de4fed4c241db9b7fcb58e66f62a2f9 ]
>
> This patch fixes stale field reference.

Applied, thanks

> Fixes: a18ac6113331 ("net/mlx5: add metadata support to Rx datapath")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
> index acbc329674a..576bc627b7b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec_altivec.h
> @@ -808,10 +808,10 @@ rxq_burst_v(struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n,
>                         (vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp1, cqe_sel_mask1);
>                 cqe_tmp2 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
>                         *(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
> -                       &cq[pos + p3].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
> +                       &cq[pos + p3].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
>                 cqe_tmp1 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
>                         *(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
> -                       &cq[pos + p2].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
> +                       &cq[pos + p2].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
>                 cqes[3] = (vector unsigned char)
>                         vec_sel((vector unsigned short)cqes[3],
>                         (vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp2,
> @@ -871,10 +871,10 @@ rxq_burst_v(struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n,
>                         (vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp1, cqe_sel_mask1);
>                 cqe_tmp2 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
>                         *(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
> -                       &cq[pos + p1].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
> +                       &cq[pos + p1].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
>                 cqe_tmp1 = (vector unsigned char)(vector unsigned long){
>                         *(__attribute__((__aligned__(8))) unsigned long *)
> -                       &cq[pos].rsvd3[9], 0LL};
> +                       &cq[pos].rsvd4[2], 0LL};
>                 cqes[1] = (vector unsigned char)
>                         vec_sel((vector unsigned short)cqes[1],
>                         (vector unsigned short)cqe_tmp2, cqe_sel_mask2);
> --
> 2.34.0
>


-- 
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:12 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
> >Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 2:27 PM
> >To: Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com>
> >Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >Subject: Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11
> >
> >On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:07 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Christian,
> >>
> >> The two fix patches from mine aimed at DPDK version after 19.11. So they
> >only need to be backported in 20.11.
> >> 04bcc80204  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix indirect descriptor reconnection
> >> ad6f01945a  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix avail descriptor ID
> >
> >Thank you,
> >they both refer to fix a patch that in turn fixes issues that existed before 19.11.
> >Hence they came into the candidate list.
> >
> >For the second one you are right, this isn't present, but 04bcc80204 refers to
> >fix 8c1df884.
> >And 8c1df884 is in 19.11.x as:
> >
> >commit 8c1df8846b15bf87beee2907dd9ecb5d5adaca1d
> >Author: Marvin Liu <yong.liu@intel.com>
> >Date:   Mon Sep 28 16:20:51 2020 +0800
> >
> >    net/virtio: fix packed ring indirect descricptors setup
> >
> >    [ upstream commit 381f39ebb78a35d8dcc2d4500419644c7de5400f ]
> >
> >
> >So do we really not need/want it?
>
> Thanks for your confirmation.
> For 04bcc80204, I will send out a patch.

Thanks in advance


> BTW, ad6f01945a refers to b473061b0e1d ("net/virtio: fix indirect descriptors in packed datapaths").
> Why hasn't this patch been backported in 19.11?

It was identified way back in time in
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2020-November/026232.html

But it didn't apply and no one bothered backporting.
Please feel free to provide backports for both b473061b0e1d +
ad6f01945a if you want to get them into 19.11.11.

> Regards,
> Xuan
>
> >
> >> Thanks for your reminder.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Xuan
> >
> >
> >--
> >Christian Ehrhardt
> >Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
> >Canonical Ltd



--
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

RE: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11

[Ding, Xuan]

Hi Christian,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
> Sent: 2021年12月6日 22:28
> To: Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com>
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release 19.11.11
> 
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:12 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
> > >Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 2:27 PM
> > >To: Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com>
> > >Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >Subject: Re: please help backporting some patches to stable release
> > >19.11.11
> > >
> > >On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:07 AM Ding, Xuan <xuan.ding@intel.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Christian,
> > >>
> > >> The two fix patches from mine aimed at DPDK version after 19.11. So
> > >> they
> > >only need to be backported in 20.11.
> > >> 04bcc80204  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix indirect descriptor reconnection
> > >> ad6f01945a  Xuan Ding        net/virtio: fix avail descriptor ID
> > >
> > >Thank you,
> > >they both refer to fix a patch that in turn fixes issues that existed before
> 19.11.
> > >Hence they came into the candidate list.
> > >
> > >For the second one you are right, this isn't present, but 04bcc80204
> > >refers to fix 8c1df884.
> > >And 8c1df884 is in 19.11.x as:
> > >
> > >commit 8c1df8846b15bf87beee2907dd9ecb5d5adaca1d
> > >Author: Marvin Liu <yong.liu@intel.com>
> > >Date:   Mon Sep 28 16:20:51 2020 +0800
> > >
> > >    net/virtio: fix packed ring indirect descricptors setup
> > >
> > >    [ upstream commit 381f39ebb78a35d8dcc2d4500419644c7de5400f ]
> > >
> > >
> > >So do we really not need/want it?
> >
> > Thanks for your confirmation.
> > For 04bcc80204, I will send out a patch.
> 
> Thanks in advance

The fix patch has been updated.

> 
> 
> > BTW, ad6f01945a refers to b473061b0e1d ("net/virtio: fix indirect descriptors
> in packed datapaths").
> > Why hasn't this patch been backported in 19.11?
> 
> It was identified way back in time in
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2020-November/026232.html
> 
> But it didn't apply and no one bothered backporting.
> Please feel free to provide backports for both b473061b0e1d + ad6f01945a if
> you want to get them into 19.11.11.
  
Packed ring feature is not popular at the moment, and it requests lots of code modifications.
I suggest not backport b473061b0e1d + ad6f01945a in 19.11.

Thanks,
Xuan

> 
> > Regards,
> > Xuan
> >
> > >
> > >> Thanks for your reminder.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Xuan
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >Christian Ehrhardt
> > >Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
> > >Canonical Ltd
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Christian Ehrhardt
> Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
> Canonical Ltd