From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sshukla@mvista.com>
Received: from mail-pf0-f182.google.com (mail-pf0-f182.google.com
[209.85.192.182]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313EA28F2
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 10:04:49 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pf0-f182.google.com with SMTP id e127so49082941pfe.3
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 01:04:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=mvista-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc; bh=+qRaSYY0/ub6cwvTGehKFSoiMMcwOTskJPq/9wKiaKI=;
b=XabYJFAttJ3/t5PeUQocEnGNQzmluvK8k9wWsTCAswd6x6SXE0pAqVD5qNBrGpOss7
9IRi8yNGKoTacvzRPVnfvaI++YpPjlPm3jASwOzC3PqZyrdNz9NZnchiMYLRwKC2pGig
tIGbhVl/HQZJFmPzeHpfLDTDlxO5BVsV7wrhunO0RJyRd33pDWQ9GEhA7BHivHFKvdGQ
8e47LbdJnbI5mj32QUemT1K7jF98ZqP2kSsjdDMXzjYSNbGxsSuL3iPYjd7l4/1O2AvP
j3KhghZnnJ5aZ7KoWqs9/KUeCllvfC7wIYR22zf8sYaWqX8EEmgL4lKrnQn3v8Pole8R
8ORg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc;
bh=+qRaSYY0/ub6cwvTGehKFSoiMMcwOTskJPq/9wKiaKI=;
b=l4HI9FW2U3/ZFEV2H/GPl6kJ0pFHsEJrJoZ1so5gg5wmsCHPm+IYtEkEfCFkvHylmq
U3Qtti042EAIhSJ8Is8d0D1PiPgI4RihwHuHcvdHLz3ymXuvVmK60yIKbS41ngenCFJU
fg4CDEzeuX0S+M4T3cDsLsnxHBuHnuYg+RJ8QcjsBjBZQR1bvXCQ0YtFJRZJTDLB2qWm
0apMya80i3X3Qwc80Yty5wMTjtF3ssa1oBCSDGE7AfGVSaNQbQrviAP7eyyB/7j0niN7
N0rNPU1JJo7euuxTMKv0i9VonNzIZhoJQJWw4jXiS0iEE4/HAN5uFUHHXmtOmCILD0EJ
p+Fw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLgvjUaQ541/PcR7uV3Kfr4TrUpX/wIsoskBP/6EnfyapjScfhrJpn6j10VmbRTcGF+xhZ54C4q3BN9/mgp
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.98.34.198 with SMTP id p67mr519853pfj.93.1456477488604; Fri,
26 Feb 2016 01:04:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.12.132 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 01:04:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C60FE0F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <CAPwdgqgVgZaRPUB+VrbExy9JTzjzKWjn2K2j=a3OS1YrkO1OvA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALwxeUvQ7pN9KDLgyhz8FU-E7xJncJA3-9pzu-z0EK2ek6VhvQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20160226022358.GG14300@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
<CALwxeUv5H6UxkZ3n--y1M7RQBivveC9=cw9cMGnUK=K+YbimxA@mail.gmail.com>
<C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C60FE0F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:34:48 +0530
Message-ID: <CAAyOgsZcEyp8wi6kJ_C9FsXf3rSnFo9uDmvKtN0Ej4uED7XX9g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com>
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] virtio PMD is not working with master version
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:04:49 -0000
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Xie, Huawei <huawei.xie@intel.com> wrote:
> On 2/26/2016 4:29 PM, David Marchand wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Yuanhan Liu
>> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> Mauricio, thanks for the testing and report.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 02:30:18PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
>>>> >From the logs, I would say I broke uio_pci_generic since we are in
>>>> "uio" case, but uio portio sysfs does not exist.
>>>> virtio pmd fell back to ioports discovery before my change.
>>> Maybe we can do same?
> We shouldn't, :). I am now rebasing the patch to fix the issue that
> virtio driver takes the virtio device blindly.
> With the patch:
> if driver is VFIO/UIO, and errors happens, returns without falling back
> to IO port.
Nice, This will be useful for non-x86 arch case, IO port is NA for
non-x86 arch so falling back to IO port would always fail. so
defaulting to IO port case is incorrect. IMO, not arch agnostic.
> if no any kernel driver is managing the device, try IO port; otherwise
> returns 1 to tell the layer we don't take over this device.
>
>> I suppose, but see below.
>>
>>> ---
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_pci.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_pci.c
>>> index 4346973..579731c 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_pci.c
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_pci.c
>>> @@ -685,12 +685,11 @@ int
>>> rte_eal_pci_ioport_map(struct rte_pci_device *dev, int bar,
>>> struct rte_pci_ioport *p)
>>> {
>>> - int ret;
>>> + int ret = -1;
>>>
>>> switch (dev->kdrv) {
>>> #ifdef VFIO_PRESENT
>>> case RTE_KDRV_VFIO:
>>> - ret = -1;
>>> if (pci_vfio_is_enabled())
>>> ret = pci_vfio_ioport_map(dev, bar, p);
>>> break;
>>> @@ -700,14 +699,14 @@ rte_eal_pci_ioport_map(struct rte_pci_device *dev, int bar,
>>> ret = pci_uio_ioport_map(dev, bar, p);
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> #if defined(RTE_ARCH_X86_64) || defined(RTE_ARCH_I686)
>>> - /* special case for x86 ... */
>>> + /* special case for x86 ... */
>>> + if (ret)
>>> ret = pci_ioport_map(dev, bar, p);
>>> -#else
>>> - ret = -1;
>>> #endif
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>> What if we are supposed to do vfio here, but for some reason init failed ?
>> Next thing, we will call ioport_read in vfio context, but init went
>> through the ioports parsing => boom ?
>>
>> Another issue is that when device is bound to a kernel driver (let's
>> say virtio-pci here), then init will succeed and pmd will kick in the
>> device registers.
>>
>> This special case should really be narrowed down to "uio" and "none"
>> driver cases.
>>
>>
>