* [PATCH] test: fix option block
@ 2024-03-14 9:46 Mingjin Ye
2024-03-15 6:49 ` Jiale, SongX
[not found] ` <LV3PR11MB8601B4FC344CC7102C5AC010E5DD2@LV3PR11MB8601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mingjin Ye @ 2024-03-14 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev; +Cc: Mingjin Ye, stable
The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
---
app/test/process.h | 17 ++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test/process.h b/app/test/process.h
index 9fb2bf481c..388c7975cd 100644
--- a/app/test/process.h
+++ b/app/test/process.h
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ add_parameter_allow(char **argv, int max_capacity)
int count = 0;
RTE_EAL_DEVARGS_FOREACH(NULL, devargs) {
- if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0)
+ if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0 || devargs->type != RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED)
continue;
if (devargs->data == NULL || strlen(devargs->data) == 0) {
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs, const char *env_value)
{
int num = 0;
char **argv_cpy;
- int allow_num;
+ int allow_num, block_num;
int argv_num;
int i, status;
char path[32];
@@ -89,7 +89,18 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs, const char *env_value)
if (pid < 0)
return -1;
else if (pid == 0) {
- allow_num = rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
+ allow_num = 0;
+ block_num = 0;
+
+ /* If block (-b) is present, allow (-a) is not added. */
+ for (i = 0; i < numargs; i++) {
+ if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0 ||
+ strcmp(argv[i], "-block") == 0)
+ block_num++;
+ }
+ if (!block_num)
+ allow_num = rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
+
argv_num = numargs + allow_num + 1;
argv_cpy = calloc(argv_num, sizeof(char *));
if (!argv_cpy)
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] test: fix option block
2024-03-14 9:46 [PATCH] test: fix option block Mingjin Ye
@ 2024-03-15 6:49 ` Jiale, SongX
[not found] ` <LV3PR11MB8601B4FC344CC7102C5AC010E5DD2@LV3PR11MB8601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jiale, SongX @ 2024-03-15 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ye, MingjinX, dev; +Cc: Ye, MingjinX, stable
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2024 5:46 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Ye, MingjinX <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH] test: fix option block
>
> The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
> Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
>
> Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
> ---
Tested-by: Jiale Song <songx.jiale@intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] test: fix option block
[not found] ` <LV3PR11MB8601B4FC344CC7102C5AC010E5DD2@LV3PR11MB8601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
@ 2024-07-03 14:35 ` Stokes, Ian
2024-07-04 8:09 ` Ye, MingjinX
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stokes, Ian @ 2024-07-03 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ye, MingjinX, dev
> > The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
> > Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
> >
> > Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
Hi Mingjin, in general the patch looks ok to me.
A general question of the behaviour of block and allow, is it always the case that the two are not allowed to be used side by side?
I had a look through the EAL documentation and didn't see and mention of this behaviour, but maybe I missed it?
Thanks
ian
> > ---
> > app/test/process.h | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test/process.h b/app/test/process.h index
> > 9fb2bf481c..388c7975cd 100644
> > --- a/app/test/process.h
> > +++ b/app/test/process.h
> > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ add_parameter_allow(char **argv, int max_capacity)
> > int count = 0;
> >
> > RTE_EAL_DEVARGS_FOREACH(NULL, devargs) {
> > - if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0)
> > + if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0 || devargs->type !=
> > +RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED)
> > continue;
> >
> > if (devargs->data == NULL || strlen(devargs->data) == 0)
> > { @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs,
> > const char *env_value) {
> > int num = 0;
> > char **argv_cpy;
> > - int allow_num;
> > + int allow_num, block_num;
> > int argv_num;
> > int i, status;
> > char path[32];
> > @@ -89,7 +89,18 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs,
> > const char *env_value)
> > if (pid < 0)
> > return -1;
> > else if (pid == 0) {
> > - allow_num =
> > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > + allow_num = 0;
> > + block_num = 0;
> > +
> > + /* If block (-b) is present, allow (-a) is not added. */
> > + for (i = 0; i < numargs; i++) {
> > + if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0 ||
> > + strcmp(argv[i], "-block") == 0)
> > + block_num++;
> > + }
> > + if (!block_num)
> > + allow_num =
> > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > +
> > argv_num = numargs + allow_num + 1;
> > argv_cpy = calloc(argv_num, sizeof(char *));
> > if (!argv_cpy)
> > --
> > 2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] test: fix option block
2024-07-03 14:35 ` Stokes, Ian
@ 2024-07-04 8:09 ` Ye, MingjinX
2024-07-04 12:02 ` Stokes, Ian
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ye, MingjinX @ 2024-07-04 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stokes, Ian, dev
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 10:35 PM
> To: Ye, MingjinX <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH] test: fix option block
>
> > > The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
> > > Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
> > >
> > > Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
>
> Hi Mingjin, in general the patch looks ok to me.
>
> A general question of the behaviour of block and allow, is it always the case
> that the two are not allowed to be used side by side?
Both cannot be used at the same time.
> I had a look through the EAL documentation and didn't see and mention of
> this behaviour, but maybe I missed it?
The "eal_common_usage" function has a clear description, see below: lib/eal/common/eal_common_options.c:2206
>
> Thanks
> ian
> > > ---
> > > app/test/process.h | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/app/test/process.h b/app/test/process.h index
> > > 9fb2bf481c..388c7975cd 100644
> > > --- a/app/test/process.h
> > > +++ b/app/test/process.h
> > > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ add_parameter_allow(char **argv, int max_capacity)
> > > int count = 0;
> > >
> > > RTE_EAL_DEVARGS_FOREACH(NULL, devargs) {
> > > - if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0)
> > > + if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0 || devargs->type !=
> > > +RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED)
> > > continue;
> > >
> > > if (devargs->data == NULL || strlen(devargs->data) == 0)
> { @@
> > > -74,7 +74,7 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs,
> > > const char *env_value) {
> > > int num = 0;
> > > char **argv_cpy;
> > > - int allow_num;
> > > + int allow_num, block_num;
> > > int argv_num;
> > > int i, status;
> > > char path[32];
> > > @@ -89,7 +89,18 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int
> > > numargs, const char *env_value)
> > > if (pid < 0)
> > > return -1;
> > > else if (pid == 0) {
> > > - allow_num =
> > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > + allow_num = 0;
> > > + block_num = 0;
> > > +
> > > + /* If block (-b) is present, allow (-a) is not added. */
> > > + for (i = 0; i < numargs; i++) {
> > > + if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0 ||
> > > + strcmp(argv[i], "-block") == 0)
> > > + block_num++;
> > > + }
> > > + if (!block_num)
> > > + allow_num =
> > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > +
> > > argv_num = numargs + allow_num + 1;
> > > argv_cpy = calloc(argv_num, sizeof(char *));
> > > if (!argv_cpy)
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] test: fix option block
2024-07-04 8:09 ` Ye, MingjinX
@ 2024-07-04 12:02 ` Stokes, Ian
2024-07-05 1:38 ` Ye, MingjinX
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stokes, Ian @ 2024-07-04 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ye, MingjinX, dev
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 10:35 PM
> > To: Ye, MingjinX <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [PATCH] test: fix option block
> >
> > > > The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
> > > > Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
> > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
> >
> > Hi Mingjin, in general the patch looks ok to me.
> >
> > A general question of the behaviour of block and allow, is it always the case
> > that the two are not allowed to be used side by side?
> Both cannot be used at the same time.
>
> > I had a look through the EAL documentation and didn't see and mention of
> > this behaviour, but maybe I missed it?
> The "eal_common_usage" function has a clear description, see below:
> lib/eal/common/eal_common_options.c:2206
I understand that, but that is a comment in code, I think the behaviour is worthy of being called out in documentation API too for usability factors.
Thanks
Ian
> >
> > Thanks
> > ian
> > > > ---
> > > > app/test/process.h | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> > > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/app/test/process.h b/app/test/process.h index
> > > > 9fb2bf481c..388c7975cd 100644
> > > > --- a/app/test/process.h
> > > > +++ b/app/test/process.h
> > > > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ add_parameter_allow(char **argv, int
> max_capacity)
> > > > int count = 0;
> > > >
> > > > RTE_EAL_DEVARGS_FOREACH(NULL, devargs) {
> > > > - if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0)
> > > > + if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0 || devargs->type !=
> > > > +RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED)
> > > > continue;
> > > >
> > > > if (devargs->data == NULL || strlen(devargs->data) == 0)
> > { @@
> > > > -74,7 +74,7 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int numargs,
> > > > const char *env_value) {
> > > > int num = 0;
> > > > char **argv_cpy;
> > > > - int allow_num;
> > > > + int allow_num, block_num;
> > > > int argv_num;
> > > > int i, status;
> > > > char path[32];
> > > > @@ -89,7 +89,18 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int
> > > > numargs, const char *env_value)
> > > > if (pid < 0)
> > > > return -1;
> > > > else if (pid == 0) {
> > > > - allow_num =
> > > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > > + allow_num = 0;
> > > > + block_num = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + /* If block (-b) is present, allow (-a) is not added. */
> > > > + for (i = 0; i < numargs; i++) {
> > > > + if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0 ||
> > > > + strcmp(argv[i], "-block") == 0)
> > > > + block_num++;
> > > > + }
> > > > + if (!block_num)
> > > > + allow_num =
> > > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > > +
> > > > argv_num = numargs + allow_num + 1;
> > > > argv_cpy = calloc(argv_num, sizeof(char *));
> > > > if (!argv_cpy)
> > > > --
> > > > 2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] test: fix option block
2024-07-04 12:02 ` Stokes, Ian
@ 2024-07-05 1:38 ` Ye, MingjinX
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ye, MingjinX @ 2024-07-05 1:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stokes, Ian, dev
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2024 8:02 PM
> To: Ye, MingjinX <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] test: fix option block
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 10:35 PM
> > > To: Ye, MingjinX <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: [PATCH] test: fix option block
> > >
> > > > > The options allow (-a) and block (-b) cannot be used at the same time.
> > > > > Therefore, allow (-a) will not be added when block (-b) is present.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes: b3ce7891ad38 ("test: fix probing in secondary process")
> > > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Mingjin Ye <mingjinx.ye@intel.com>
> > >
> > > Hi Mingjin, in general the patch looks ok to me.
> > >
> > > A general question of the behaviour of block and allow, is it always
> > > the case that the two are not allowed to be used side by side?
> > Both cannot be used at the same time.
> >
> > > I had a look through the EAL documentation and didn't see and
> > > mention of this behaviour, but maybe I missed it?
> > The "eal_common_usage" function has a clear description, see below:
> > lib/eal/common/eal_common_options.c:2206
>
> I understand that, but that is a comment in code, I think the behaviour is
> worthy of being called out in documentation API too for usability factors.
Sorry for not providing complete information. There is processing logic in "eal_parse_common_option".
Unsatisfied condition outputs "Options allow (-a) and block (-b) can't be used at the same time".
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > ian
> > > > > ---
> > > > > app/test/process.h | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> > > > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/app/test/process.h b/app/test/process.h index
> > > > > 9fb2bf481c..388c7975cd 100644
> > > > > --- a/app/test/process.h
> > > > > +++ b/app/test/process.h
> > > > > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ add_parameter_allow(char **argv, int
> > max_capacity)
> > > > > int count = 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > RTE_EAL_DEVARGS_FOREACH(NULL, devargs) {
> > > > > - if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0)
> > > > > + if (strlen(devargs->name) == 0 || devargs->type !=
> > > > > +RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED)
> > > > > continue;
> > > > >
> > > > > if (devargs->data == NULL || strlen(devargs->data)
> == 0)
> > > { @@
> > > > > -74,7 +74,7 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int
> > > > > numargs, const char *env_value) {
> > > > > int num = 0;
> > > > > char **argv_cpy;
> > > > > - int allow_num;
> > > > > + int allow_num, block_num;
> > > > > int argv_num;
> > > > > int i, status;
> > > > > char path[32];
> > > > > @@ -89,7 +89,18 @@ process_dup(const char *const argv[], int
> > > > > numargs, const char *env_value)
> > > > > if (pid < 0)
> > > > > return -1;
> > > > > else if (pid == 0) {
> > > > > - allow_num =
> > > > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > > > + allow_num = 0;
> > > > > + block_num = 0;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* If block (-b) is present, allow (-a) is not added. */
> > > > > + for (i = 0; i < numargs; i++) {
> > > > > + if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0 ||
> > > > > + strcmp(argv[i], "-block") == 0)
> > > > > + block_num++;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + if (!block_num)
> > > > > + allow_num =
> > > > > rte_devargs_type_count(RTE_DEVTYPE_ALLOWED);
> > > > > +
> > > > > argv_num = numargs + allow_num + 1;
> > > > > argv_cpy = calloc(argv_num, sizeof(char *));
> > > > > if (!argv_cpy)
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-07-05 1:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-03-14 9:46 [PATCH] test: fix option block Mingjin Ye
2024-03-15 6:49 ` Jiale, SongX
[not found] ` <LV3PR11MB8601B4FC344CC7102C5AC010E5DD2@LV3PR11MB8601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2024-07-03 14:35 ` Stokes, Ian
2024-07-04 8:09 ` Ye, MingjinX
2024-07-04 12:02 ` Stokes, Ian
2024-07-05 1:38 ` Ye, MingjinX
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).