Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2 v4] fm10k: Free queues when close port

["Qiu, Michael" <michael.qiu@intel.com>]

On 6/26/2015 7:02 PM, Iremonger, Bernard wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Qiu, Michael
>> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 9:30 AM
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Chen, Jing D; He, Shaopeng; Iremonger, Bernard; Qiu, Michael
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2 v4] fm10k: Free queues when close port
>>
>> When close a port, lots of memory should be released, such as software
>> rings, queues, etc.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Qiu <michael.qiu@intel.com>
>> ---
> Hi Michael,
>
> There are 2 comments inline 
>
>>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c | 37
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
>> b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
>> index 406c350..eba7228 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
>> @@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ static void
>>  fm10k_MAC_filter_set(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, const u8 *mac, bool add);
>> static void  fm10k_MACVLAN_remove_all(struct rte_eth_dev *dev);
>> +static void fm10k_tx_queue_release(void *queue); static void
>> +fm10k_rx_queue_release(void *queue);
>>
>>  static void
>>  fm10k_mbx_initlock(struct fm10k_hw *hw) @@ -809,11 +811,37 @@
>> fm10k_dev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>>
>>  	PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE();
>>
>> -	for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_tx_queues; i++)
>> -		fm10k_dev_tx_queue_stop(dev, i);
>> +	if (dev->data->tx_queues)
>> +		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_tx_queues; i++)
>> +			fm10k_dev_tx_queue_stop(dev, i);
>>
>> -	for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
>> -		fm10k_dev_rx_queue_stop(dev, i);
>> +	if (dev->data->rx_queues)
>> +		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
>> +			fm10k_dev_rx_queue_stop(dev, i);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void
>> +fm10k_dev_queue_release(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) {
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE();
>> +
>> +	if (dev->data->tx_queues) {
>> +		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_tx_queues; i++)
>> +			fm10k_tx_queue_release(dev->data-
>>> tx_queues[i]);
>> +		rte_free(dev->data->tx_queues);
>> +		dev->data->tx_queues = NULL;
> The memory for dev->data->tx_queues  is not allocated in the fm10k PMD,
> so it should probably not be released here.
> I have submitted a patch today for rte_eth_dev.c  to do this.  
> /dev/patchwork/patch/5829/
>
>> +		dev->data->nb_tx_queues = 0;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (dev->data->rx_queues) {
>> +		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
>> +			fm10k_rx_queue_release(dev->data-
>>> rx_queues[i]);
>> +		rte_free(dev->data->rx_queues);
>> +		dev->data->rx_queues = NULL;
> The memory for dev->data->rx_queues  is not allocated in the fm10k PMD,
> so it should probably not be released here.
> I have submitted a patch today for rte_eth_dev.c  to do this.  
> /dev/patchwork/patch/5829/

Is it a good idea?  What about to close the port for twice at a time?
I think it is better to do it in rte_eth_dev_close(), I will give the
comments to you.

Thanks,
Michael

> Regards,
>
> Bernard.
>
>
>> +		dev->data->nb_rx_queues = 0;
>> +	}
>>  }
>>
>>  static void
>> @@ -828,6 +856,7 @@ fm10k_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>>  	/* Stop mailbox service first */
>>  	fm10k_close_mbx_service(hw);
>>  	fm10k_dev_stop(dev);
>> +	fm10k_dev_queue_release(dev);
>>  	fm10k_stop_hw(hw);
>>  }
>>
>> --
>> 1.9.3
>