From: gowrishankar muthukrishnan <gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Gaëtan Rivet" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>,
"Declan Doherty" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
"Ferruh Yigit" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
rasland@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/bonding: support bifurcated driver in eal cli using --vdev
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 14:29:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a0e66e39-3660-2266-3a47-95d64f34c080@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19317053.0GOQUN8yPN@xps>
Hi Thomas,
I will rework on my patch with these suggestions and send new version.
Thanks Declan and Gaëtan. Thank you Thomas too reminding me.
Regards,
Gowrishankar
On Tuesday 05 September 2017 02:43 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Ping - any news?
>
> 31/07/2017 16:34, Gaëtan Rivet:
>> Hi Gowrishankar, Declan,
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:02:24PM +0530, gowrishankar muthukrishnan wrote:
>>> On Friday 07 July 2017 09:08 PM, Declan Doherty wrote:
>>>> On 04/07/2017 12:57 PM, Gowrishankar wrote:
>>>>> From: Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan <gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> At present, creating bonding devices using --vdev is broken for PMD like
>>>>> mlx5 as it is neither UIO nor VFIO based and hence PMD driver is unknown
>>>>> to find_port_id_by_pci_addr(), as below.
>>>>>
>>>>> testpmd <EAL args> --vdev 'net_bonding0,mode=1,slave=<PCI>,socket_id=0'
>>>>>
>>>>> PMD: bond_ethdev_parse_slave_port_kvarg(150) - Invalid slave port value
>>>>> (<PCI ID>) specified
>>>>> EAL: Failed to parse slave ports for bonded device net_bonding0
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch fixes parsing PCI ID from bonding device params by verifying
>>>>> it in RTE PCI bus, rather than checking dev->kdrv.
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes:
>>>>> v2 - revisit fix by iterating rte_pci_bus
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan
>>>>> <gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>> ...
>>>> Hey Gowrishankar,
>>>>
>>>> I was having a look at this patch and there is the following checkpatch
>>>> error.
>>>>
>>>> _coding style issues_
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WARNING:AVOID_EXTERNS: externs should be avoided in .c files
>>>> #48: FILE: drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c:43:
>>>> +extern struct rte_pci_bus rte_pci_bus;
>>>>
>>> Hi Declan,
>>> Thank you for your review.
>>> Yes, but I also saw some references like above in older code.
>>>
>>>> Looking at bit closer at the issue I think there is a simpler solution,
>>>> the bonding driver really shouldn't be parsing the PCI bus directly, and
>>>> since PCI devices use the PCI DBF as their name we can simply replace the
>>>> all the scanning code with a simple call to rte_eth_dev_get_port_by_name
>>>> API.
>>>>
>> I agree that it would be better to be able to use the ether API for
>> this.
>>
>> The issue is that PCI devices are inconsistent regarding their names. The
>> possibility is given to the user to employ the simplified BDF format for
>> PCI device name, instead of the DomBDF format.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the default device name for a PCI device is in the DomBDF
>> format. This means that the name won't match if the device was probed by
>> using the PCI blacklist mode (the default PCI mode).
>>
>> The matching must be refined.
>>
>>> But you are removing an option to mention ports by PCI addresses right (as
>>> I see parse_port_id() completely removed in your patch) ?.
>>> IMO, we just need to check if given eth pci id (incase we mention ports ib
>>> PCI ID) is one of what EAL scanned in PCI. Also, slaves should not be from
>>> any blacklisted PCI ids (as we test with -b or -w).
>>>
>> Declan is right about the iteration of PCI devices. The device list for
>> the PCI bus is private, the extern declaration to the rte_pci_bus is the
>> telltale sign that there is something wrong in the approach here.
>>
>> In order to respect the new rte_bus logic, I think what you want to
>> achieve can be done by using the rte_bus->find_device with the correct
>> device comparison function.
>>
>> static int
>> pci_addr_cmp(const struct rte_device *dev, const void *_pci_addr)
>> {
>> struct rte_pci_device *pdev;
>> char *addr = _pci_addr;
>> struct rte_pci_addr paddr;
>> static struct rte_bus *pci_bus = NULL;
>>
>> if (pci_bus == NULL)
>> pci_bus = rte_bus_find_by_name("pci");
>>
>> if (pci_bus->parse(addr, &paddr) != 0) {
>> /* Invalid PCI addr given as input. */
>> return -1;
>> }
>> pdev = RTE_DEV_TO_PCI(dev);
>> return rte_eal_compare_pci_addr(&pdev->addr, &paddr);
>> }
>>
>> Then verify that you are able to get a device by using it as follows:
>>
>> {
>> struct rte_bus *pci_bus;
>> struct rte_device *dev;
>>
>> pci_bus = rte_bus_find_by_name("pci");
>> if (pci_bus == NULL) {
>> RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, "Unable to find PCI bus\n");
>> return -1;
>> }
>> dev = pci_bus->find_device(NULL, pci_addr_cmp, devname);
>> if (dev == NULL) {
>> RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, "Unable to find the device %s to enslave.\n",
>> devname);
>> return -EINVAL;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> I hope it's clear enough. You can find examples of use for this API in
>> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c
>>
>> It's a quick implementation to outline the possible direction, I
>> haven't compiled it. It should be refined.
>>
>> For example, the PCI address validation should not be happening in the
>> comparison function, the pci_bus could be matched once instead of twice,
>> etc...
>>
>> But the logic should work.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-06 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-14 10:49 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Gowrishankar
2017-06-15 13:54 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-06-16 14:34 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-07-04 11:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Gowrishankar
2017-07-07 15:38 ` Declan Doherty
2017-07-10 6:32 ` gowrishankar muthukrishnan
2017-07-31 14:34 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-09-05 9:13 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-09-06 8:59 ` gowrishankar muthukrishnan [this message]
2017-10-02 8:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [Suspected-Phishing]Re: " Raslan Darawsheh
2017-10-02 8:44 ` gowrishankar muthukrishnan
2017-10-03 8:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [Suspected-Phishing]Re: " Raslan Darawsheh
2017-09-20 18:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Gowrishankar
2017-10-02 11:06 ` Doherty, Declan
2017-10-02 23:32 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-10-02 12:09 ` Gaëtan Rivet
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=a0e66e39-3660-2266-3a47-95d64f34c080@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=gaetan.rivet@6wind.com \
--cc=rasland@mellanox.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).