From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC2CD1B104 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 17:04:27 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Nov 2018 08:04:26 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,291,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="93559171" Received: from rnicolau-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.57]) ([10.237.221.57]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2018 08:04:24 -0800 To: Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>, Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com, chas3@att.com References: <1542197949-15992-1-git-send-email-radu.nicolau@intel.com> <2e452920-4514-6395-27e5-f7457de01797@intel.com> <9425dd1c-877a-0bee-72b8-6aae9617286f@intel.com> <6839bca3-a8f9-b3c9-9d58-66296d00e75a@gmail.com> From: Radu Nicolau Message-ID: <0c2a1ddf-726a-c3ef-e786-97a04aebe897@intel.com> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 16:04:24 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6839bca3-a8f9-b3c9-9d58-66296d00e75a@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/bond: wait for slaves to become active X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 16:04:28 -0000 On 11/28/2018 2:28 PM, Chas Williams wrote: > > > On 11/28/2018 08:48 AM, Radu Nicolau wrote: >> Hi >> >> >> On 11/28/2018 11:08 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >>> On 11/14/2018 12:19 PM, Radu Nicolau wrote: >>>> Do not start the packet processing threads until all configured >>>> slaves become active. >>> Hi Radu, >>> >>> What happens if packet processing threads started before all slaves >>> active? Exit >>> app, error, crash? >>> >>> So can we say this patch is fixing packet forwarding? (fix in title?) >>> >>> And do we know what break it, why this was not required previously >>> but required >>> now? (Fixes line ?) >>  From what I see, the problem was always there: bond_ethdev_rx_burst >> will cycle through slaves, but if called more times with no active >> slaves the active slave index will point out of bounds, resulting in >> a segfault. >> While this may require a better fix, this patch is an improvement >> even if that fix comes - the configured slaves needs to be checked, >> and if none became active there is no point going further. >> >> in bond_ethdev_rx_burst: >> >> slave_count = internals->active_slave_count; >> ... >>      if (++internals->active_slave == slave_count) >>          internals->active_slave = 0; >> slave_count is zero, the if() will never be true and active_slave >> will be continuously incremented. It was not written to work with no >> active slaves. > > Just create another patch for the rx routines.  If the active_slave_count > is 0, there's nothing to do really.  It should just return and not > bother with any of the other work. I can do that, and it will be the better fix I mentioned. But I still think this patch makes the sample app better, at least it gives a hint to someone looking to develop its own app to check on the slaves' status before proceeding to rx. > >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> ferruh >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau >>>> --- >>>>   examples/bond/main.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ >>>>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/examples/bond/main.c b/examples/bond/main.c >>>> index b282e68..6623cae 100644 >>>> --- a/examples/bond/main.c >>>> +++ b/examples/bond/main.c >>>> @@ -220,6 +220,7 @@ bond_port_init(struct rte_mempool *mbuf_pool) >>>>       struct rte_eth_rxconf rxq_conf; >>>>       struct rte_eth_txconf txq_conf; >>>>       struct rte_eth_conf local_port_conf = port_conf; >>>> +    uint16_t wait_counter = 20; >>>>       retval = rte_eth_bond_create("net_bonding0", BONDING_MODE_ALB, >>>>               0 /*SOCKET_ID_ANY*/); >>>> @@ -274,6 +275,20 @@ bond_port_init(struct rte_mempool *mbuf_pool) >>>>       if (retval < 0) >>>>           rte_exit(retval, "Start port %d failed (res=%d)", >>>> BOND_PORT, retval); >>>> +    printf("Waiting for slaves to become active..."); >>>> +    while (wait_counter) { >>>> +        uint16_t act_slaves[16] = {0}; >>>> +        if (rte_eth_bond_active_slaves_get(BOND_PORT, act_slaves, >>>> 16) == >>>> +                slaves_count) { >>>> +            printf("\n"); >>>> +            break; >>>> +        } >>>> +        sleep(1); >>>> +        printf("..."); >>>> +        if (--wait_counter == 0) >>>> +            rte_exit(-1, "\nFailed to activate slaves\n"); >>>> +    } >>>> + >>>>       rte_eth_promiscuous_enable(BOND_PORT); >>>>       struct ether_addr addr; >>>> >>