From: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
To: "Gaëtan Rivet" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
Cc: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:00:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM6PR0502MB3797BFAA93A01E03FBE0989BD2130@AM6PR0502MB3797.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180108134654.wb7svquzhuuvvmh6@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
Hi Gaetan
From: Gaëtan Rivet, Monday, January 8, 2018 3:47 PM
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 12:55:49PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > Hi Gaetan
> >
> > From: Gaëtan Rivet, Monday, January 8, 2018 12:58 PM
> > > Hi Matan,
> > >
> > > Sorry for the delay on this.
> > >
> >
> > It's OK in spite of I need to fetch it back :)
> >
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:58:29AM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
<snip>
> > > And this kind of code-flow is not unusual, or even unwanted.
> > > I dislike having this kind of implicit rule derived from using a
> > > helper such as fs_is_error().
> > >
> > > The alternative
> > >
> > > if ((err = fs_err(sdev, err))) {
> > > ERROR("xxxx");
> > > return err;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Forces the value err to be set to the correct one.
> > >
> > Good point, will change it.
> >
> > > This mistake can already be found in your patch:
> > >
> > > > @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@
> > > > continue;
> > > > local_ret = rte_flow_destroy(PORT_ID(sdev),
> > > > flow->flows[i], error);
> > > > - if (local_ret) {
> > > > + if (fs_is_error(sdev, local_ret)) {
> > > > ERROR("Failed to destroy flow on sub_device %d: %d",
> > > > i, local_ret);
> > > > if (ret == 0)
> > >
> >
> > Sorry, I can't see any issue here.
> >
>
> You're right, actually the code would still be correct.
> I checked again the rest of the edit, there shouldn't be any issue, usually "0"
> is explicitly returned.
>
> Still, the point stands.
>
Yes.
> > > Your environment does not include the function, but this is within
> > > fs_flow_destroy (please update to include the context by the way it
> > > helps a lot the review :). Afterward, line 162 ret is directly used as return
> value.
> > >
> > I don't understand what do you mean.
> >
> > > Also, fs_err() would need to transform rte_errno when relevant
> > > (mostly in failsafe_flow.c I think).
> > >
> > Your suggestion is always to update rte_errno to 0 in case the error is
> because of removal?
> >
>
> If the error is indeed due to the device being absent, then rte_errno should
> be set back to its previous value I think.
So, I think it will require old rte_errno save before each device command...
Why not to set it to 0 in the special case(removal) by the new internal API?
>
> --
> Gaëtan Rivet
> 6WIND
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-08 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 98+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-02 15:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Fail-safe fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2017-11-02 15:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] net/failsafe: " Matan Azrad
2017-11-06 8:19 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-11-02 15:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/mlx4: adjust removal error Matan Azrad
2017-11-03 13:05 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2017-11-05 6:52 ` Matan Azrad
2017-11-06 16:51 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2017-11-02 15:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2017-11-03 13:06 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2017-11-05 6:57 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] Fail-safe fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2017-12-13 14:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [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
2017-12-14 14:43 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/6] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 17:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-12-19 17:24 ` Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 20:51 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-19 22:13 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-20 8:39 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-07 9:53 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/6] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/6] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/6] ethdev: adjust APIs removal error report Matan Azrad
2018-01-07 9:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/6] ethdev: adjust flow " Matan Azrad
2018-01-07 9:58 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-19 17:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2017-12-19 22:21 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-12-20 10:58 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-08 10:57 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-08 12:55 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-08 13:46 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-08 14:00 ` Matan Azrad [this message]
2018-01-08 14:31 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-10 12:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/6] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/6] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/6] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/6] ethdev: adjust APIs removal error report Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 5/6] ethdev: adjust flow " Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 12:43 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-10 13:51 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-10 13:47 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/6] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:40 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/6] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/6] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/6] ethdev: adjust APIs removal error report Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/6] ethdev: adjust flow " Matan Azrad
2018-01-17 20:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 8:44 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/6] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 17:18 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-18 17:57 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2018-01-18 18:02 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/6] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 16:59 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/6] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 16:59 ` Adrien Mazarguil
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 4/6] ethdev: adjust APIs removal error report Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 17:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-18 18:10 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-19 16:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-19 17:35 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-19 17:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-01-19 18:13 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-19 18:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-01-20 19:04 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 20:28 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-01-20 20:45 ` Matan Azrad
2018-01-21 20:07 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 5/6] ethdev: adjust flow " Matan Azrad
2018-01-18 11:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] ethdev: add devop to check removal status Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/6] net/mlx4: support a device removal check operation Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/6] net/mlx5: " Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 4/6] ethdev: adjust APIs removal error report Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 5/6] ethdev: adjust flow " Matan Azrad
2018-01-20 21:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 6/6] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling Matan Azrad
2018-01-21 20:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/6] Fail-safe\ethdev: fix removal handling lack 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=AM6PR0502MB3797BFAA93A01E03FBE0989BD2130@AM6PR0502MB3797.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com \
--to=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gaetan.rivet@6wind.com \
--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).