From: "Gaëtan Rivet" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
Cc: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:27:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171214132701.rwlyymuzvrl3tgsu@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0502MB365936804A133CBE6BEAA5D7D20A0@HE1PR0502MB3659.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 01:07:31PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> Hi Gaetan
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gaëtan Rivet [mailto:gaetan.rivet@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 12:49 PM
> > To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
> > Cc: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> > <thomas@monjalon.net>; dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:40:22AM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > Hi Gaetan
> > >
> >
<snip>
> > > > Ok, actually you were right here to do it this way. The "is_removed"
> > > > check needs to happen after the operation attempt to effectively
> > > > mitigate the possible race. Checking before attempting the call will
> > > > be much less effective.
> > > >
> > > > That being said, would it be cleaner to have eth_dev ops return
> > > > -ENODEV directly, and check against it within fail-safe?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think that according to "is_removed" semantic we must return a Boolean
> > value (Each value different from '0' means that the device is removed) like
> > other functions in c library (for example isspace()).
> > >
> >
> > Sure, I wasn't discussing the interface proposed by
> > rte_eth_dev_is_removed().
> >
> > What I meant was to ask whether checking rte_eth_dev_is_removed()
> > would be more interesting in the ethdev layer, making the eth_dev_ops
> > return -ENODEV regardless of the previous error if this check is supported by
> > the driver and signal that the port is removed.
> >
> > I think this information could be interesting to other systems, not just fail-
> > safe.
> >
>
> Ok. Got you now.
> Interesting approach - plan:
> 1. update fs_link_update to use rte_eth* functions.
I'm surprised it doesn't already.
Either the rte_eth* function was introduced after the failsafe, or be
wary of potential issues. I don't see a problem right now though.
> 2. maybe -EIO is preferred because -ENODEV is used for no port error?
Good point, didn't think about it.
Prepare yourself maybe to some arguments about the most relevant error
code. -EIO seems fine to me, but maybe use a wrapper for all this.
Something like:
---8<---
static int
eth_error(pid, int original_ret)
{
int ret;
if (original_ret == 0)
return original_ret;
ret = rte_eth_is_removed(pid);
if (ret == 0 || ret == -ENOTSUP)
return original_ret;
return -EIO;
}
int
rte_eth_ops_xyz(pid)
{
int ret;
ret = eth_dev(pid).ops_xyz();
return eth_error(pid, ret);
}
--->8---
This way you would be able to change it easily and the logic would be
insulated.
> 3. update all relevant rte_eth* to use "is_removed" in error flows(1 patch for flow APIs and 1 for the others).
> 4. Change fs checks in error flows to check rte_eth* return values.
> 5. Remove CC stable from commit massage.
>
> What do you think?
>
Agreed otherwise.
Thanks,
> > --
> > Gaëtan Rivet
> > 6WIND
--
Gaëtan Rivet
6WIND
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-14 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1509637324-13525-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
2017-11-02 15:42 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 1/3] net/failsafe: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2017-11-06 8:19 ` Gaëtan Rivet
[not found] ` <1513175370-16583-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 15:16 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-13 15:48 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 16:09 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-13 17:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-14 10:40 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 21:55 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-14 10:40 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-14 10:48 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-14 13:07 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-14 13:27 ` Gaëtan Rivet [this message]
2017-12-14 14:43 ` Matan Azrad
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=20171214132701.rwlyymuzvrl3tgsu@bidouze.vm.6wind.com \
--to=gaetan.rivet@6wind.com \
--cc=adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=matan@mellanox.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).