From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2238646071;
Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:23:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0547B402A7;
Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:23:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from szxga08-in.huawei.com (szxga08-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.255])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2314040261
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:23:28 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.252])
by szxga08-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4YWqXp4jplz1W45j;
Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:19:38 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [10.3.19.47])
by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAE64180214;
Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:23:26 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) by
dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server
(version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
15.1.2507.39; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:23:26 +0800
Received: from [10.67.121.59] (10.67.121.59) by kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com
(7.202.194.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 13 Jan
2025 19:23:25 +0800
Message-ID: <870781f8-951e-7575-0ee0-7b1ceb7833c0@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:23:25 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ethdev: fix skip valid port in probing callback
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
CC: <dev@dpdk.org>, <stephen@networkplumber.org>, <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
"Ajit Khaparde" <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>, Somnath Kotur
<somnath.kotur@broadcom.com>, Praveen Shetty <praveen.shetty@intel.com>,
Andrew Boyer <andrew.boyer@amd.com>, Dariusz Sosnowski
<dsosnowski@nvidia.com>, Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>, "Bing
Zhao" <bingz@nvidia.com>, Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>, Suanming Mou
<suanmingm@nvidia.com>, Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>, Chaoyong He
<chaoyong.he@corigine.com>, Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
<fengchengwen@huawei.com>
References: <20250113025521.32703-1-lihuisong@huawei.com>
<1988729.PYKUYFuaPT@thomas> <0293d4d1-0df7-63e1-3dba-244729a78bb0@huawei.com>
<9389517.CDJkKcVGEf@thomas>
From: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <9389517.CDJkKcVGEf@thomas>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.67.121.59]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To
kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112)
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
在 2025/1/13 18:57, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 13/01/2025 10:35, lihuisong (C):
>> 在 2025/1/13 16:16, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>> 13/01/2025 03:55, Huisong Li:
>>>> The event callback in application may use the macro RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV to
>>>> iterate over all enabled ports to do something(like, verifying the port id
>>>> validity) when receive a probing event. If the ethdev state of a port is
>>>> not RTE_ETH_DEV_UNUSED, this port will be considered as a valid port.
>>>>
>>>> However, this state is set to RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED after pushing probing
>>>> event. It means that probing callback will skip this port. But this
>>>> assignment can not move to front of probing notification. See
>>>> commit be8cd210379a ("ethdev: fix port probing notification")
>>>>
>>>> So this patch has to add a new state, RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED. Set the ethdev
>>>> state to RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED before pushing probing event and set it to
>>>> RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED after definitely probed. And this port is valid if its
>>>> device state is 'ALLOCATED' or 'ATTACHED'.
>>> If you do that, changing the definition of eth_dev_find_free_port()
>>> you allow the application using a port before probing is finished.
>> Yes, it's not reasonable.
>>
>> Thinking your comment twice, I feel that the root cause of this issue is
>> application want to check if the port id is valid.
>> However, application just receive the new event from the device and the
>> port id of this device must be valid when report new event.
>> So application can think the received new event is valid and don't need
>> to check, right?
> Yes
> Do you think it should be highlighted in the API doc?
Security detection is common and always good for application.
So I think it's better to highlight that in doc.
If it's ok to you, I will add some comments for RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW.
>
> We currently have this:
> RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW, /**< port is probed */
>
>
>> If so I think this series can be dropped.
>>> It is the same as changing the state to RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED
>>> before calling the event callback.
>>>
>>> So this is a NACK.
>>>
>>> Why do you need drivers to check the state of a notified device?
>>> If it is RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW, you know that's a new device,
>>> there is nothing else to check.
>> It just modified the verification about RTE_ETH_DEV_UNUSED in the device
>> driver.
>> Driver not need to know the event.
> Sorry I was not clear.
> I said "drivers", but it should be "apps & drivers" because they can both
> register to the event RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW.
> In some situations, it is convenient for a driver to listen to new ports
> (it was done for failsafe driver).
Yes. but it doesn't matter now.😁
>
>
> .