Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 10/11] eal: replace rte_panic instances in init sequence

["Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>]

On 19-Apr-18 7:01 AM, Arnon Warshavsky wrote:
> Local functions to this file,
> changing from void to int are non-abi-breaking.
> For handling the single function that cannot
> change from void to int due to abi,
> where this is the only place it is called in,
> I added a state variable that is being checked
> right after the call to this function.

A rewrite of commit message is in order, i think :) Something like this:

Change some functions' return type from void to int. This will not break 
ABI because they are internal only.

(see below for comments on lcore changes)

> 
> --
> 
> v4 - fix split literal strings in log messages
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>

Again, please do not add patch/version notes to the commit message, put 
them after "---". Version history is not for commit messages, it's for 
people reviewing it before merge.

> ---
>   lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c           |  86 ++++++++++++++-------
>   lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_thread.c    |  65 +++++++++++-----
>   lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_launch.c |  21 ++++++
>   lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_debug.h |  12 +++
>   lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c         | 120 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
>   lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_thread.c  |  65 +++++++++++-----
>   6 files changed, 270 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
> index d996190..9c2f6f1 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ enum rte_iova_mode
>    * We also don't lock the whole file, so that in future we can use read-locks
>    * on other parts, e.g. memzones, to detect if there are running secondary
>    * processes. */
> -static void
> +static int

<...>

> +
> +/* move to panic state and do not return */
> +static __attribute__((noreturn)) void
> +defunct_and_remain_in_endless_loop(void)
> +{
> +	rte_move_to_panic_state();
> +	while (1)
> +		sleep(1);
>   }

It seems like you're mixing two different patchsets here. Maybe it would 
be beneficial to put lcore changes in a separate patch? Technically, 
rte_panic's in lcore are not part of init sequence.

(also, should panic state be volatile?)

>   
>   /* main loop of threads */
> @@ -106,8 +123,11 @@ void eal_thread_init_master(unsigned lcore_id)
>   		if (thread_id == lcore_config[lcore_id].thread_id)
>   			break;
>   	}
> -	if (lcore_id == RTE_MAX_LCORE)
> -		rte_panic("cannot retrieve lcore id\n");
> +	if (lcore_id == RTE_MAX_LCORE) {
> +		RTE_LOG(CRIT, EAL, "%s(): Cannot retrieve lcore id\n",


-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly