DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
	"ophirmu@mellanox.com" <ophirmu@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/tap: add queues when attaching from secondary process
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 23:51:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2122883.JrNZV5Vflb@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A1EE6F3E-FAD5-44DB-923C-D714F351542C@intel.com>

20/07/2018 17:35, Wiles, Keith:
> > On Jul 20, 2018, at 4:15 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > +	/* FIXME: handle replies.nb_received > 1 */
> 
> I am not a big fan of having TODO or FIXME comments in the code.

What don't you like in such comments?

> Can we remove them and just describe the problem and what would happen
> or not happen if the condition occurs?

You mean describing the problem in the code?

> If we need to add this support in the future then we need to put these
> in a enhancement tracker or someplace else.

The limitation is documented in the guide (limit of 8 queues).

> > +	reply = &replies.msgs[0];

[...]
> > +	/* FIXME: split message if more queues than RTE_MP_MAX_FD_NUM */
> 
> Here too.

This limitation is related to the previous one (send only one message,
receive only message).

> > +	RTE_ASSERT(reply.num_fds <= RTE_MP_MAX_FD_NUM);
> > +
> > +	/* Send reply */
> > +	strcpy(reply.name, request->name);
> > +	strcpy(reply_param->port_name, request_param->port_name);
> 
> Normally we use the snprintf or strlcpy() functions for the above should we do that here too?

Yes it looks to be a good idea.


> > @@ -1946,8 +2056,18 @@ rte_pmd_tap_probe(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
> > 			TAP_LOG(ERR, "Failed to probe %s", name);
> > 			return -1;
> > 		}
> > -		/* TODO: request info from primary to set up Rx and Tx */
> > 		eth_dev->dev_ops = &ops;
> > +		eth_dev->rx_pkt_burst = pmd_rx_burst;
> > +		eth_dev->tx_pkt_burst = pmd_tx_burst;
> > +
> > +		if (!rte_eal_primary_proc_alive(NULL)) {
> > +			TAP_LOG(ERR, "Primary process is missing");
> > +			return -1;
> > +		}
> > +		ret = tap_mp_attach_queues(name, eth_dev);
> > +		if (ret != 0)
> > +			return -1;
> 
> Does the call above need to be wrapped using if secondary process or is this for both primary and secondary?

It is already in a "secondary only" block.

> > +	/* Register IPC feed callback */
> > +	ret = rte_mp_action_register(TAP_MP_KEY, tap_mp_sync_queues);
> > +	if (ret < 0 && rte_errno != EEXIST) {
> > +		TAP_LOG(ERR, "%s: Failed to register IPC callback: %s",
> > +			tuntap_name, strerror(rte_errno));
> > +		goto leave;
> > +	}
> 
> Same for this one as above?

This code path is executed only in primary or creation of port in secondary.
I think it is fine.

However I am thinking it should be registered only once for all TAP ports.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-20 21:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-07 12:29 [dpdk-dev] [RFC] " Raslan Darawsheh
2018-06-07 19:09 ` Wiles, Keith
2018-06-07 23:24   ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-06-08  2:52     ` Wiles, Keith
2018-06-12 12:46     ` Wiles, Keith
2018-06-12 13:21       ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-07-20 10:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Thomas Monjalon
2018-09-27 11:19   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] net/tap: change queue fd to be pointers to process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-09-27 11:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] net/tap: add queues when attaching from secondary process Raslan Darawsheh
2018-09-27 13:04       ` Wiles, Keith
2018-09-27 18:53         ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-02 10:34       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] net/tap: change queue fd to be pointers to process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-02 10:34         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] net/tap: add queues when attaching from secondary process Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-02 10:41           ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-02 10:50             ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-02 11:38               ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-03 16:28                 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-02 10:43           ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-03 16:31             ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-03 18:00           ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-03 17:59         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] net/tap: change queue fd to be pointers to process private Ferruh Yigit
2018-09-27 13:17     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 " Wiles, Keith
2018-10-02 10:30       ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-02 12:58         ` Wiles, Keith
2018-10-03 17:27           ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-07-20 11:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/tap: add queues when attaching from secondary process Thomas Monjalon
2018-07-20 15:35   ` Wiles, Keith
2018-07-20 21:51     ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2018-07-21 13:44       ` Wiles, Keith
2018-08-23 11:51   ` Ferruh Yigit

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=2122883.JrNZV5Vflb@xps \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
    --cc=ophirmu@mellanox.com \
    --cc=rasland@mellanox.com \
    /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).