From: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com> To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com>, <dev@dpdk.org> Cc: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>, <stable@dpdk.org>, Chas Williams <chas3@att.com>, Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com>, Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] net/bonding: fix non-active slaves aren't stopped Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 09:16:30 +0800 Message-ID: <a72101a6-6175-0f08-4c01-f06f915fbeb1@huawei.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <0b879860-1465-4bd2-a15a-530306202586@xilinx.com> Hi, Ferruh, 在 2022/5/4 3:04, Ferruh Yigit 写道: > On 5/3/2022 7:54 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: >> Hi, Ferruh, >> >> 在 2022/4/29 21:31, Ferruh Yigit 写道: >>> On 4/29/2022 7:45 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: >>>> Hi, Ferruh, >>>> >>>> 在 2022/4/27 2:19, Ferruh Yigit 写道: >>>>> On 3/24/2022 3:00 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: >>>>>> From: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> When stopping a bonded port, all slaves should be deactivated. But >>>>>> only >>>>> >>>>> s/deactivated/stopped/ ? >>>> not agreed. deactivated and stopped are different state for slave. >>>> >>> >>> Just to clarify the sentences, otherwise I see the 'stopped' and >>> 'deactivated' states are different. >>> Next sentences complains that not all ports are stopped: "But only >>> active slaves are stopped.", so I thought intention in this sentences >>> to claim that all slaves should be stopped (but it mentions all >>> slaves should be 'deactivated'). >>> As long as you address the disconnection between two sentences, I >>> don't mind the wording. >> Actually, there is something wrong with the wording. >> Yes, I should take your advice. >> >>> >>>>> >>>>>> active slaves are stopped. So fix it and do "deactivae_slave()" >>>>>> for active >>>>> >>>>> s/deactivae_slave()/deactivate_slave()/ >>>>> >>>> agreed. >>>> >>>>>> slaves. >>>>> >>>>> Hi Connor, >>>>> >>>>> When a bonding port is closed, is it clear if all slave ports or >>>>> active slave ports should be stopped? >>>> Yes, I think all the slave ports should be stopped(or try to be >>>> stopped). >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Fixes: 0911d4ec0183 ("net/bonding: fix crash when stopping mode 4 >>>>>> port") >>>>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 20 +++++++++++--------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >>>>>> b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >>>>>> index b305b6a35b..469dc71170 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >>>>>> @@ -2118,18 +2118,20 @@ bond_ethdev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev) >>>>>> internals->link_status_polling_enabled = 0; >>>>>> for (i = 0; i < internals->slave_count; i++) { >>>>>> uint16_t slave_id = internals->slaves[i].port_id; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + internals->slaves[i].last_link_status = 0; >>>>>> + ret = rte_eth_dev_stop(slave_id); >>>>>> + if (ret != 0) { >>>>>> + RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, "Failed to stop device on port %u", >>>>>> + slave_id); >>>>>> + return ret; >>>>> >>>>> Should it return here or try to stop all ports? >>>>> What about to record the return status, but keep continue to stop >>>>> all ports. And return error if any of the stop failed? >> Well, I am glad you have found something unreasaonable about 'stop'. >> Let us see API 'rte_eth_dev_stop' >> >> rte_eth_dev_stop(dev) >> { >> .... >> dev->data->dev_started = 0; >> ret = (*dev->dev_ops->dev_stop)(dev) >> retur ret; >> } >> This is unreasaonable. No matter 'dev_ops->dev_stop' succeed or fail, >> the state 'dev_started ' will always set to be '0'. >> >> But this does not only influence bonding device but other devices like >> eth dev or vdev. >> This is the bug in rte ethdev level. I will send another patch to fix >> it. >> > > Hi Connor, > > I agree this is an issue in the API, cc'ed Andrew and Thomas. > > I vaguely remember that "dev_started = 0" was required for some dev_ops, > but not quite sure, let me check this. > At worst we can do as following to be sure: > > dev->data->dev_started = 0; > ret = (*dev->dev_ops->dev_stop)(dev) > if (ret) > dev->data->dev_started = 1; > > Also we need to clarify in the API documentation (.h file), what is the > status of the device if 'rte_eth_dev_stop()' returned error. > > > Btw, would you be OK to separate this ethdev patch from your bonding > patch, to not stuck your series because of ethdev one. Yes, this patch can be abandoned from this set. > > >> >>>> I think no need to do this. APP only see the bonded device. If bonded >>>> device stop failed, it means it works failed. And the number of >>>> "stopped" successfully slave does not make any sense. >>>> >>> >>> OK if trying to stop as much as possible 'slave' devices doesn't make >>> sense, we can keep as it is. >>> >>> Btw, when functions fails at this point, bonding device itself >>> already marked as stopped, right? And some of the slave devices may >>> be stopped already before failure. >>> I don't know how confusing this is for the user, that stop() function >>> is failed but bonding device state is 'stopped'. I don't know if >>> function should recover at least bonding device status (back to >>> started) on failure, what do you think? >>> >>>>> >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + >>>>>> + /* active slaves need to deactivate. */ >>>>> >>>>> " active slaves need to be deactivated. " ? >>>> agreed. >>>>> >>>>>> if (find_slave_by_id(internals->active_slaves, >>>>>> internals->active_slave_count, slave_id) != >>>>>> - internals->active_slave_count) { >>>>>> - internals->slaves[i].last_link_status = 0; >>>>>> - ret = rte_eth_dev_stop(slave_id); >>>>>> - if (ret != 0) { >>>>>> - RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, "Failed to stop device on port >>>>>> %u", >>>>>> - slave_id); >>>>>> - return ret; >>>>>> - } >>>>>> + internals->active_slave_count) >>>>> >>>>> I think original indentation for this line is better. >>>>> >>>> agreed. >>>>>> deactivate_slave(eth_dev, slave_id); >>>>>> - } >>>>>> } >>>>>> return 0; >>>>> >>>>> . >>> >>> . > > .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-05 1:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <20211025063922.34066-1-humin29@huawei.com> [not found] ` <20220324030036.4761-1-humin29@huawei.com> 2022-03-24 3:00 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-04-26 18:19 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-04-29 6:45 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-04-29 13:31 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-03 6:54 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-03 19:04 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-05 1:16 ` Min Hu (Connor) [this message] 2022-03-24 3:00 ` [PATCH V2 2/4] net/bonding: fix non-terminable while loop Min Hu (Connor) 2022-04-26 18:19 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-04-29 6:52 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-04-29 13:35 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-03-24 3:00 ` [PATCH V2 3/4] app/testpmd: fix port status of slave device Min Hu (Connor) 2022-03-24 3:00 ` [PATCH V2 4/4] app/testpmd: fix slave device isn't released Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-30 6:01 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-30 10:21 ` Singh, Aman Deep [not found] ` <20220503100217.46203-1-humin29@huawei.com> 2022-05-03 10:02 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] net/bonding: fix non-active slaves aren't stopped Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-03 10:02 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] net/bonding: fix non-terminable while loop Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-03 10:02 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] app/testpmd: fix port status of slave device Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-03 23:39 ` Konstantin Ananyev 2022-05-06 8:16 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-08 11:28 ` Konstantin Ananyev 2022-05-10 16:34 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-10 21:48 ` Konstantin Ananyev 2022-05-11 2:16 ` Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-11 10:05 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-11 2:14 ` [PATCH v4] " Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-11 22:08 ` Konstantin Ananyev 2022-05-19 7:15 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2022-05-03 10:02 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] app/testpmd: fix slave device isn't released Min Hu (Connor) 2022-06-01 17:54 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-06-07 8:15 ` Dongdong Liu 2022-06-07 8:10 ` [PATCH v4] " Dongdong Liu 2022-06-07 14:31 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-06-09 7:50 ` Dongdong Liu 2022-06-09 8:50 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-06-09 11:20 ` Dongdong Liu 2022-06-09 11:49 ` [PATCH v5] " Dongdong Liu 2022-06-10 8:10 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-03 10:02 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] ethdev: fix dev state when stop Min Hu (Connor) 2022-05-25 17:44 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-05-26 10:21 ` Thomas Monjalon 2022-05-30 12:04 ` Ferruh Yigit
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=a72101a6-6175-0f08-4c01-f06f915fbeb1@huawei.com \ --to=humin29@huawei.com \ --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \ --cc=chas3@att.com \ --cc=dev@dpdk.org \ --cc=ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com \ --cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \ --cc=radu.nicolau@intel.com \ --cc=stable@dpdk.org \ --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \ /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
patches for DPDK stable branches This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/stable/0 stable/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 stable stable/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/stable \ stable@dpdk.org public-inbox-index stable Example config snippet for mirrors. Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.stable AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git