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>,
"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 13:07:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <HE1PR0502MB365936804A133CBE6BEAA5D7D20A0@HE1PR0502MB3659.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171214104856.d5qgnawuzb54l36z@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
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>
>
> > > >
> > > > If you add this check in the iterator itself, you would skip
> > > > removed devices before attempting operating upon them, right?
> > > >
> > > > Then it should probably help with your issue, unless you tested it
> > > > and verified that it didnt?
> > > >
> > > > Something like this:
> > > >
> > > > ---8<---
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_private.h
> > > > b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_private.h
> > > > index d81cc3ca6..62ddc0689 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_private.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_private.h
> > > > @@ -316,8 +316,12 @@ fs_find_next(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > subs = PRIV(dev)->subs;
> > > > tail = PRIV(dev)->subs_tail;
> > > > while (sid < tail) {
> > > > + if (min_state > DEV_PROBED &&
> > > > + fs_is_removed(&sub[sid]))
> > > > + goto next;
> > > > if (subs[sid].state >= min_state)
> > > > break;
> > > > +next:
> > > > sid++;
> > > > }
> > > > *sid_out = sid;
> > > >
> > > > --->8---
> > > >
> > > > Only issue being that it is completely racy, but as this MT-unsafe
> > > > property is inescapable we might as well ignore it and go for KISS.
> > > >
> > > > If that's enough, I would prefer instead of having this additional
> > > > check added to all rte_eth operations.
> > > >
> > >
> > > 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.
2. maybe -EIO is preferred because -ENODEV is used for no port error?
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?
> --
> Gaëtan Rivet
> 6WIND
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-14 13:07 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 [this message]
2017-12-14 13:27 ` Gaëtan Rivet
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=HE1PR0502MB365936804A133CBE6BEAA5D7D20A0@HE1PR0502MB3659.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com \
--to=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gaetan.rivet@6wind.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).