Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: Fix port validation code of "port stop all" command

[Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>]

On 2015/03/09 12:49, Qiu, Michael wrote:
> On 3/9/2015 10:22 AM, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote:
>> On 2015/03/06 22:53, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Qiu, Michael
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:33 PM
>>>> To: Tetsuya Mukawa; dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: Fix port validation code of "port
>>>> stop all" command
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Tetsuya and Pablo
>>>> This is not a full fix, I have generate the full fix patch two days ago,
>> Hi Michel,
>>
>> I am sorry for late replying, and thanks for your work.
>>
>>> Sorry I did not see this earlier. Did you upstream this patch already?
>>> I acked Tetsuya's patch, as it was simple and works, but I cannot find
>>> this one.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pablo
>>>
>>>> See below:
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c
>>>> index 49be819..ec53923 100644
>>>> --- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
>>>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
>>>> @@ -384,6 +384,9 @@ port_infos_display(portid_t port_id)
>>>>  int
>>>>  port_id_is_invalid(portid_t port_id, enum print_warning warning)
>>>>  {
>>>> +       if (port_id == (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL)
>>>> +               return 0;
>>>> +
>> I am not clearly sure that we need to add above 'if statement'.
> Because some times RTE_PORT_ALL will pass to port start/stop/close, but
> the check will be invalid.
>
> Actually, we should see it as valid, then all port valid check will work
> for start/stop/close action
>
>>>>         if (ports[port_id].enabled)
>>>>                 return 0;
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>> index e556b4c..1c4c651 100644
>>>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>> @@ -1326,6 +1326,9 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
>>>>                 return -1;
>>>>         }
>>>>
>>>> +       if (port_id_is_invalid(pid, ENABLED_WARN))
>>>> +               return 0;
>>>> +
>> Same as above.
>>
>>>>         if (init_fwd_streams() < 0) {
>>>>                 printf("Fail from init_fwd_streams()\n");
>>>>                 return -1;
>>>> @@ -1482,10 +1485,14 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
>>>>                 dcb_test = 0;
>>>>                 dcb_config = 0;
>>>>         }
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (port_id_is_invalid(pid, ENABLED_WARN))
>>>> +               return;
>>>> +
>> Same as above.
>>
>>>>         printf("Stopping ports...\n");
>>>>
>>>>         FOREACH_PORT(pi, ports) {
>>>> -               if (!port_id_is_invalid(pid, DISABLED_WARN) && pid != pi)
>>>> +               if (pid != pi && pid != (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL)
>>>>                         continue;
>>>>
>>>>                 port = &ports[pi];
>>>> @@ -1517,10 +1524,13 @@ close_port(portid_t pid)
>>>>                 return;
>>>>         }
>>>>
>>>> +       if (port_id_is_invalid(pid, ENABLED_WARN))
>>>> +                return;
>>>> +
>> Same as above.
>>
>>>>         printf("Closing ports...\n");
>>>>
>>>>         FOREACH_PORT(pi, ports) {
>>>> -               if (!port_id_is_invalid(pid, DISABLED_WARN) && pid != pi)
>>>> +               if (pid != pi && pid != (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL)
>>>>                         continue;
>>>>
>>>>                 port = &ports[pi];
>>>> --
>>>> 1.9.3
>> FOREACH_PORT() returns valid ports, so is it not enough to check like above?
>> I am not clearly understand which case we need to add above extra if
>> statements.
>> Could you please describe?
> Yes,  just consider this situation, the valid port number are [0, 1],
> but you try to to stop prot number 2, what will happen?
>
> Noting will be show, at least we need an error log.
>
> So it must be check.

Hi Michael,

Thanks, I've understood it.
Have you already submitted it as patch?
I could not find it in patchwork.
I will send an ack to your patch.

Thanks,
Tetsuya

> Thanks,
> Michael
>> But I agree we cannot use my previous patch.
>> We need to fix not only stop_port() but also close_port() like start_port().
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tetsuya
>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> On 3/5/2015 3:31 PM, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote:
>>>>> When "port stop all" is executed, the command doesn't work as it should
>>>>> because of wrong port validation. The patch fixes this issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 2 +-
>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>>> index 61291be..bb65342 100644
>>>>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>>> @@ -1484,7 +1484,7 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
>>>>>  	printf("Stopping ports...\n");
>>>>>
>>>>>  	FOREACH_PORT(pi, ports) {
>>>>> -		if (!port_id_is_invalid(pid, DISABLED_WARN) && pid != pi)
>>>>> +		if (pid != pi && pid != (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL)
>>>>>  			continue;
>>>>>
>>>>>  		port = &ports[pi];
>>