From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <3chas3@gmail.com> Received: from mail-it0-f65.google.com (mail-it0-f65.google.com [209.85.214.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5014CA7; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:06:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-it0-f65.google.com with SMTP id e14-v6so2247902itf.1; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 07:06:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=tDhJWxnYt4CBnxRtJ4WjjhlfL6XRRli2eEO4BrqjBEY=; b=Nh7E4Ene5p4nDU2nKYSDFfwAXInmqjri4MEl1zfneT1lWN6JZ3tzmt9I5FKsa8/p7L ctYebjfY8xXiT/BPCuYbFVN7AFMRPe1QI/rroyM+YP8o7TIWBSL6KcnNsTnlOQ99IH8v iQPPWq9Epdr44pKhwbAVx2fMs0yctmsvIJXvo2mwQn9S8oslMCTXYm7Z97inuLGVzHXa rcbeq6uk6tNlRhxo0/pm9A9MdSl8SElZBM9tMqToWubdFQ0kOyE65FgzVBXXK89xwwtk 3qxUSozgMgP+JWrjGT4F1u3fIIOXFkKSBxSB5Q/1hLB6JWetOPgo2a+HK/+/ldGtJQvj EzZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=tDhJWxnYt4CBnxRtJ4WjjhlfL6XRRli2eEO4BrqjBEY=; b=gr7YK9f6tzxyBxied7QsaRs02o+VNxuQ2gq48VNl+/1+PzvFuLYVLruNDqSt4ZOJzS a1LfuHxegEln3LH641amFWaiNf5lNaSvY+OFH2pfcM0x7Pr/CVPT3QSqG6Tk4+3r8GcH LX3CR/GRUxCHsibqRH1Ecz9D/cURtDjT7+xsnIo83SKIB3NnK6SYAU5gq5vdz87O1Cf8 2+QVSMDn20C72l/gSqJlfhJd6ymTaXCl+qrb+Plq7kIvqr7smqSqIduUsoq/q5fzTsss dwx9XjsZEBGg/cLzxeh8qV1FvH3w8we4a0lriFckYYzi8THXCPw+sST9Ssa6y0TQK9OQ ipOg== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51B5UcLMMo69WxBBYgUoRy/7nve0oHQQnixgxHr2DcjZIKEWoG1h ILOduCpmwoBDirskA3uz7wgO6sC7bUGzfYYaLYM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbAVQxquHUf5rQo04DvhPf1rThQahKLXZziUSxtgWUVxhD3c+capfjSLNB13+79tUdGdzyJhBEB61LE83HmW+I= X-Received: by 2002:a24:6b0d:: with SMTP id v13-v6mr1628047itc.16.1535119569395; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 07:06:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1533129523-1407-1-git-send-email-radu.nicolau@intel.com> <0c16cb66-6ee4-ff2d-6d16-7a3fdd021b0c@intel.com> <11360076.HoYMhSRcrZ@xps> In-Reply-To: From: Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:05:58 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Thomas Monjalon , Chas Williams , dev@dpdk.org, Declan Doherty , Radu Nicolau , stable@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/bonding: stop and deactivate slaves when bonding port is stopped X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:06:10 -0000 On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 6:39 AM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 8/23/2018 4:21 PM, Chas Williams wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 9:15 AM Ferruh Yigit > > wrote: > > > > On 8/6/2018 4:50 PM, Chas Williams wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:55 PM Thomas Monjalon < > thomas@monjalon.net > > > wrote: > > > > > >> 02/08/2018 15:38, Doherty, Declan: > > >>> On 01/08/2018 2:18 PM, Radu Nicolau wrote: > > >>>> When a bonding port is stopped also stop and deactivate all > slaves. > > >>>> Otherwise slaves will be still listed as active. > > >>>> > > >>>> Fixes: 69bce062132b ("net/bonding: do not clear active slave > count") > > >>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > >>>> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau > > > > >>> > > >>> Acked-by: Declan Doherty > > > > >> > > >> Waiting for opinion from the other bonding maintainer (Chas) > > >> who started to review and has some doubts. > > >> > > > > > > The slaves being listed as active is not a bug. If the slaves are > not > > > deactivated, then they should be considered activated. Previously, > > > stopping the bonding PMD just reset the active slave count. That's > > > not the right way to deactivate slaves. This was fixed by > 69bce062132b. > > > > > > This patch is new behavior of explicitly deactivating the slaves > when > > > the bonding PMD is stopped. > > > > > > As I mentioned, I think this makes life difficult for those of us > using > > > an external state machine. However, that should probably be fixed > > > differently then. > > > > > > > > >> > > >> Chas, please do you agree with Declan's ack? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Change the Fixes line. > > > > Hi Chas, > > > > Are you OK with the rest of the patch if Fixes line fixed? > > If already have a proposed fixes line I can fix it while merging. > > > > > > Yes, the rest of the patch is fine as long as the Fixes is correct. > > Try this: > > > > Fixes: 2efb58cbab6e ("bond: new link bonding library") > > > > And it's really new behavior. Perhaps Fixes: isn't quite right. > > The current code works fine with activated slaves existing outside > > of the stop/star. > > From your description dropping Fixes line seems OK, but it will effect if > the > patch backported or not. > Then dont' drop the Fixes line. See below. > Isn't it clear from bonding requirement what should slave ports' status be > when > bonding port it stopped? > I am guessing the author's original intent was to deactivate all the slaves because he reset the activate slave count to 0. However, that didn't actually deactivate a slave and later activating an already active slave after another start would result in some odd failures. In a more existential sense, what does active mean? In the case of 802.3ad, a slave is potentially active until the protocol says otherwise which means a timeout. So the stopped/started aspect of the port isn't necessarily a concern. If you are just briefly stopping a port to reconfigure, perhaps you don't want to renegotiate the 802.3ad state. Of course, if you reconfigure a port, there is a good chance you want to renegotiate with the other end anyway. TL;DR -- fine with this patch. Add new Fixes line so backported.