From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DC2D5F33 for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 18:13:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 May 2018 09:13:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,463,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="233538475" Received: from rnicolau-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.67]) ([10.237.221.67]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 May 2018 09:13:58 -0700 To: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com References: <1527777275-9974-1-git-send-email-radu.nicolau@intel.com> <2d1f24aa-b752-5031-f063-1394c47d64ff@intel.com> <2c61f454-9c44-39d3-3258-3f894175186d@intel.com> From: Radu Nicolau Message-ID: <0cbf7312-4d54-3240-82a8-239c34fc8005@intel.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 17:13:57 +0100 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: <2c61f454-9c44-39d3-3258-3f894175186d@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/bonding: fix update link status on slave add 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: Thu, 31 May 2018 16:14:00 -0000 On 5/31/2018 4:36 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 5/31/2018 4:34 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> On 5/31/2018 3:34 PM, Radu Nicolau wrote: >> >> I can see you just prefix "fix" to the title without updating it :) >> >> What about following one: >> "net/bonding: fix slave add for mode 4" ? Great, I'll use it for v3 :) >> >>> Add a call to rte_eth_link_get_nowait on every slave to update >>> the internal link status struct. Otherwise slave add will fail >>> for mode 4 if the ports are all stopped but only one of them checked. >> What is the link related expectation from slaves in mode 4? To be identical across all ports >> >> What does "if the ports are all stopped but only one of them checked" mean, why >> checking only one of them? This is the behavior of testpmd, stop getting the link status after the first down port; but this should not affect bonding, so there is no need to update testpmd. >> >>> Fixes: b77d21cc2364 ("ethdev: add link status get/set helper functions") >>> Bugzilla entry: https://dpdk.org/tracker/show_bug.cgi?id=52 > Bugzilla ID: 52 > > btw, can you please send new version as reply to previous version? Sure. > >>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau >>> --- >>> v2: add fix and Bugzilla references >>> >>> drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_api.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_api.c b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_api.c >>> index d558df8..cad08b9 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_api.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_api.c >>> @@ -296,6 +296,8 @@ __eth_bond_slave_add_lock_free(uint16_t bonded_port_id, uint16_t slave_port_id) >>> return -1; >>> } >>> >>> + rte_eth_link_get_nowait(slave_port_id, &link_props); >>> + >> The error seems in link_properties_valid(), does it make sense to get link info >> inside that function before link checks? Not really, as one might expect that link_properties_valid will only test the struct rte_eth_link *slave_link argument, not update it. >> >>> slave_add(internals, slave_eth_dev); >>> >>> /* We need to store slaves reta_size to be able to synchronize RETA for all >>>