From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
"keith.wiles@intel.com" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:59:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d1c7cee3-15d4-ab71-41bd-b26b0352f59c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB5PR05MB125418029C1564F6ED4DCADAC2FF0@DB5PR05MB1254.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/17/2018 7:54 AM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 2:28 PM
>> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>; keith.wiles@intel.com
>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; dev@dpdk.org; Shahaf
>> Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>; Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access
>> primary device queues
>>
>> On 10/16/2018 11:06 AM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
>>> Hi Ferruh,
>>>
>>> I didn't do it this way since I don't want it to unregister in case it was the
>> second device for example and it failed to prob.
>>> Which means only the first probed tap and the last removed tap will handle
>> this registration and deregistration.
>>
>> What I am saying will do the same, only register in the first device probed and
>> unregister in the last device.
>>
>> `tap_devices_count` is already there, why you don't rely on it, but call
>> rte_mp_action_register() anyway and rely on it will return EEXIST in second
>> and later calls.
>>
>> Both will work, just I think using `tap_devices_count` is simpler.
>>
> You are right about probing.
> but, not in the closing of the ports,
> since any port will try to unregister the first one which will do the unregister will succeed.
> meanwhile, I need only the last one to unregister.
The unregister done already with `tap_devices_count` checks, all I am suggesting
is doing same thing for register part.
>
>>>
>>> Kindest regards,
>>> Raslan Darawsheh
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 7:33 PM
>>>> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>; keith.wiles@intel.com
>>>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; dev@dpdk.org; Shahaf
>>>> Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>; Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to
>>>> access primary device queues
>>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2018 3:39 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
>>>>> @@ -2082,6 +2214,14 @@ rte_pmd_tap_probe(struct rte_vdev_device
>>>> *dev)
>>>>> TAP_LOG(NOTICE, "Initializing pmd_tap for %s as %s",
>>>>> name, tap_name);
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* Register IPC feed callback */
>>>>> + ret = rte_mp_action_register(TAP_MP_KEY, tap_mp_sync_queues);
>>>>> + if (ret < 0 && rte_errno != EEXIST && tap_devices_count) {
>>>>> + TAP_LOG(ERR, "%s: Failed to register IPC callback: %s",
>>>>> + tuntap_name, strerror(rte_errno));
>>>>> + goto leave;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + tap_devices_count++;
>>>>> ret = eth_dev_tap_create(dev, tap_name, remote_iface,
>>>> &user_mac,
>>>>> ETH_TUNTAP_TYPE_TAP);
>>>>
>>>> Why not rely on "tap_devices_count" but call rte_mp_action_register()
>>>> every time and try to figure out status from ret?
>>>>
>>>> if (tap_devices_count == 0) {
>>>> ret = rte_mp_action_register(TAP_MP_KEY, tap_mp_sync_queues);
>>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>>> TAP_LOG();
>>>> goto leave;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> tap_devices_count++;
>>>
>
>
> Kindest regards,
> Raslan Darawsheh
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-17 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-10 14:39 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-10 14:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] net/tap: move fds of Rx/Tx queues to be in process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-11 16:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-16 10:07 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-16 11:24 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-17 8:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 8:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] net/tap: move fds of Rx/Tx queues to be in process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 8:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 12:06 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-17 14:46 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 14:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 14:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/3] net/tap: move fds of Rx/Tx queues to be in process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 14:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 16:02 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-18 8:11 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 8:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 8:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 2/3] net/tap: move fds of Rx/Tx queues to be in process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 8:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 10:09 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-18 10:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 10:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 2/3] net/tap: move fds of Rx/Tx queues to be in process private Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 10:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-18 11:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 1/3] net/tap: add queue and port ids in Rx/Tx queues structures Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-18 12:56 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-10 14:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] net/tap: allow secondary process to access primary device queues Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-11 16:32 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-16 10:06 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-16 11:27 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-17 6:54 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2018-10-17 7:59 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d1c7cee3-15d4-ab71-41bd-b26b0352f59c@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
--cc=orika@mellanox.com \
--cc=rasland@mellanox.com \
--cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).