From: "Gaëtan Rivet" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] net/failsafe: fix removal scope
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:19:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180208171931.oxiqp6433pmft36m@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1518107653-15466-3-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
Hi Matan,
Thanks for dealing with this.
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 04:34:12PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> Fail-safe PMD uses per sub-device flag called "remove" to indicate the
> scope where the sub-device isn't synchronized with the fail-safe state.
>
> This flag is set when fail-safe gets RMV notification about the
> physical removal of the sub-device and should be unset when the
> sub-device completes all the configurations cause it to arrive to the
> fail-safe state.
>
> The previous code wrongly unsets the flag after calling to the
> sub-device PMD dev_configure() operation and before all the
> configurations were done.
>
> Change the remove flag unsetting to be only after the sub-device
> successes to arrive to the fail-safe state.
>
I'm not sure this is the right way to do this.
I think it's clear that it was a mistake to set sdev->remove to 0
only during fs_dev_configure.
The flag itself only means "there is something to be done on this
device, please clean up".
Once the clean-up has happened, then the flag is not necessary anymore
and should be reset.
So I thought that this fix would actually put the flag reset within
fs_dev_remove, right before reinstalling the hotplug alarm.
At this point, the device state would have been set back to
DEV_UNDEFINED, so the remove flag is unnecessary for any operation
trying to avoid unplugged slaves.
The "remove" flag is initialized at 0 when sub-devices are allocated
(during fail-safe init). This means that there would be a difference in
the state of the slave between its first initialization and any
subsequent init, after one successful plugout.
> Fixes: a46f8d5 ("net/failsafe: add fail-safe PMD")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ether.c | 2 ++
> drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ether.c b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ether.c
> index 4c6e938..ca42376 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ether.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ether.c
> @@ -377,6 +377,8 @@
> i);
> goto err_remove;
> }
> + if (PRIV(dev)->state < DEV_STARTED)
> + sdev->remove = 0;
Here the remove flag should already be 0. If it isn't, this is a
(logical) bug, which should be properly addressed instead of patched
in this way.
> }
> }
> /*
> diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c
> index 7a67e16..a7c2dba 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,6 @@
> dev->data->dev_conf.intr_conf.lsc = 0;
> }
> DEBUG("Configuring sub-device %d", i);
> - sdev->remove = 0;
This is correct.
> ret = rte_eth_dev_configure(PORT_ID(sdev),
> dev->data->nb_rx_queues,
> dev->data->nb_tx_queues,
> @@ -197,6 +196,7 @@
> return ret;
> }
> sdev->state = DEV_STARTED;
> + sdev->remove = 0;
This seems unnecessary, if this operation was already performed once the
device has been properly removed.
> }
> if (PRIV(dev)->state < DEV_STARTED)
> PRIV(dev)->state = DEV_STARTED;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
Gaëtan Rivet
6WIND
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-08 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-09 19:27 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/failsafe: fix calling device during RMV events Ophir Munk
2017-09-11 8:31 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-09-23 21:57 ` Ophir Munk
2017-10-05 22:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Ophir Munk
2017-10-20 10:35 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-10-23 7:17 ` Ophir Munk
2017-10-23 8:36 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2017-11-29 19:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-18 22:22 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-01-18 23:35 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-02-08 12:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] failsafe: " Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 12:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] net/failsafe: fix hotplug alarm cancel Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 12:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] net/failsafe: fix calling device during RMV events Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/3] failsafe: " Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] net/failsafe: fix hotplug alarm cancel Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] net/failsafe: fix removal scope Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 17:19 ` Gaëtan Rivet [this message]
2018-02-08 19:03 ` Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] net/failsafe: fix calling device during RMV events Matan Azrad
2018-02-08 18:11 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-02-08 19:24 ` Matan Azrad
2018-02-11 17:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] failsafe: fix hotplug races Matan Azrad
2018-02-11 17:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] net/failsafe: fix hotplug alarm cancel Matan Azrad
2018-02-11 17:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] net/failsafe: fix removal scope Matan Azrad
2018-02-11 17:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] net/failsafe: fix hotplug races Matan Azrad
2018-02-12 18:33 ` Gaëtan Rivet
2018-02-12 20:35 ` Matan Azrad
2018-02-12 20:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] failsafe: " Matan Azrad
2018-02-12 20:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] net/failsafe: fix hotplug alarm cancel Matan Azrad
2018-02-12 20:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] net/failsafe: fix removal scope Matan Azrad
2018-02-12 20:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] net/failsafe: fix hotplug races Matan Azrad
2018-02-13 13:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] failsafe: " Gaëtan Rivet
2018-02-13 16:12 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-02-13 20:58 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2018-02-13 21:13 ` Matan Azrad
2018-02-13 21:21 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=20180208171931.oxiqp6433pmft36m@bidouze.vm.6wind.com \
--to=gaetan.rivet@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/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).