From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6E42A62 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 06:59:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Nov 2017 21:59:29 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,344,1508828400"; d="scan'208";a="180021627" Received: from tanjianf-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.238.224.76]) ([10.238.224.76]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2017 21:59:28 -0800 To: Kyle Larose , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <1512068332-98288-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <26d38eefe9814bfcb29b058b8922dc8c@sandvine.com> Cc: Matthew Coppola From: "Tan, Jianfeng" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:59:27 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <26d38eefe9814bfcb29b058b8922dc8c@sandvine.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/vdev: scan and probe vdev in secondary processes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 05:59:30 -0000 Hi Kyle, On 12/1/2017 6:27 AM, Kyle Larose wrote: > Hey Jianfeng, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jianfeng Tan >> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 1:59 PM >> To: dev@dpdk.org >> Cc: Jianfeng Tan >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/vdev: scan and probe vdev in >> secondary processes >> >> Base on primary/secondary communication channel [1], we add vdev >> action to scan virtual devices in secondary processes. >> >> [1] http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/31838/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Jianfeng Tan >> --- >> drivers/bus/vdev/vdev.c | 104 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 100 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> > > > We recently stumbled across a problem where running dpdk-pdump against > a primary which had an rte_eth_bond virtual device would lead to a crash. > > We realized this was happening because the vdev bus wasn't being built > properly on the secondary, leading to it corrupting the ethdev structures > for the eth_bond device on the primary. This corruption occurred because pdump > used what it thought was the first free dpdk port id for its pcap_pmd. That > port id collided with the eth_bond pmd, causing the problem. > > My feeling is that this patch will fix that problem, since probing the virtual > bus from the primary, rather than just from the eal cmdline arguments, will > allow the secondary to choose an used port id. Am I correct in my understanding? Yes, that's an issue we want to address in this patch set: those portid (either physical port or virtual port) will be synchronized to secondary, if the secondary wants to add port (private to the secondary), it will use unused portid. But we still not address the problem that, both the primary and the secondary are allocating new devices which needs a centralized portid management mechanism. Thanks, Jianfeng > > Thanks, > > Kyle > >