From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A680CA0505 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 10:16:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A98E4281B; Fri, 6 May 2022 10:16:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB384014F; Fri, 6 May 2022 10:16:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kwepemi500012.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4KvjxV2ZZbzGpVF; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:13:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.103.128] (10.67.103.128) by kwepemi500012.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:16:02 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] app/testpmd: fix port status of slave device To: Konstantin Ananyev , CC: Huisong Li , , Aman Singh , Xiaoyun Li , Yuying Zhang , Pablo de Lara , Bernard Iremonger References: <20220324030036.4761-1-humin29@huawei.com> <20220503100217.46203-1-humin29@huawei.com> <20220503100217.46203-4-humin29@huawei.com> <45233ff7-512c-f50a-7b56-8970737d3efe@yandex.ru> From: "Min Hu (Connor)" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 16:16:01 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <45233ff7-512c-f50a-7b56-8970737d3efe@yandex.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To kwepemi500012.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.12) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Hi, Konstantin, 在 2022/5/4 7:39, Konstantin Ananyev 写道: > 03/05/2022 11:02, Min Hu (Connor) пишет: >> From: Huisong Li >> >> Starting or stopping a bonded port also starts or stops all active slaves >> under the bonded port. If this port is a bonded device, we need to modify >> the port status of all slaves. >> >> Fixes: 0e545d3047fe ("app/testpmd: check stopping port is not in >> bonding") >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >> >> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li >> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) >> Acked-by: Aman Singh >> --- >>   app/test-pmd/cmdline.c |  1 + >>   app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>   app/test-pmd/testpmd.h |  3 +- >>   3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> index 6ffea8e21a..d9fc7a88bd 100644 >> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> @@ -6671,6 +6671,7 @@ static void cmd_create_bonded_device_parsed(void >> *parsed_result, >>                   "Failed to enable promiscuous mode for port %u: %s - >> ignore\n", >>                   port_id, rte_strerror(-ret)); >> +        ports[port_id].bond_flag = 1; >>           ports[port_id].need_setup = 0; >>           ports[port_id].port_status = RTE_PORT_STOPPED; >>       } >> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> index fe2ce19f99..dc90600787 100644 >> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c >> @@ -66,6 +66,9 @@ >>   #ifdef RTE_EXEC_ENV_WINDOWS >>   #include >>   #endif >> +#ifdef RTE_NET_BOND >> +#include >> +#endif >>   #include "testpmd.h" >> @@ -597,11 +600,57 @@ eth_dev_configure_mp(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t >> nb_rx_q, uint16_t nb_tx_q, >>       return 0; >>   } >> +#ifdef RTE_NET_BOND >> +static int >> +change_bonding_slave_port_status(portid_t bond_pid, bool is_stop) >> +{ >> +    portid_t slave_pids[RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS]; >> +    struct rte_port *port; >> +    int num_slaves; >> +    portid_t slave_pid; >> +    int i; >> + >> +    num_slaves = rte_eth_bond_slaves_get(bond_pid, slave_pids, >> +                        RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS); >> +    if (num_slaves < 0) { >> +        fprintf(stderr, "Failed to get slave list for port = %u\n", >> +            bond_pid); >> +        return num_slaves; >> +    } >> + >> +    for (i = 0; i < num_slaves; i++) { >> +        slave_pid = slave_pids[i]; >> +        port = &ports[slave_pid]; >> +        port->port_status = >> +            is_stop ? RTE_PORT_STOPPED : RTE_PORT_STARTED; >> +    } >> + >> +    return 0; >> +} >> +#endif >> + >>   static int >>   eth_dev_start_mp(uint16_t port_id) >>   { >> -    if (is_proc_primary()) >> -        return rte_eth_dev_start(port_id); >> +    int ret; >> + >> +    if (is_proc_primary()) { >> +        ret = rte_eth_dev_start(port_id); >> +        if (ret != 0) >> +            return ret; >> + >> +#ifdef RTE_NET_BOND >> +        struct rte_port *port = &ports[port_id]; >> + >> +        /* >> +         * Starting a bonded port also starts all slaves under the >> bonded >> +         * device. So if this port is bond device, we need to modify the >> +         * port status of these slaves. >> +         */ >> +        if (port->bond_flag == 1) >> +            return change_bonding_slave_port_status(port_id, false); >> +#endif >> +    } >>       return 0; >>   } >> @@ -609,8 +658,25 @@ eth_dev_start_mp(uint16_t port_id) >>   static int >>   eth_dev_stop_mp(uint16_t port_id) >>   { >> -    if (is_proc_primary()) >> -        return rte_eth_dev_stop(port_id); >> +    int ret; >> + >> +    if (is_proc_primary()) { >> +        ret = rte_eth_dev_stop(port_id); >> +        if (ret != 0) >> +            return ret; >> + >> +#ifdef RTE_NET_BOND > > Here and in other places - probably no need to pollute the code > with all these 'ifdef RTE_NET_BOND'. > I suppose this logic (for checking is bonding API present or not) > can be hidden inside change_bonding_slave_port_status() itself. > I think it does not pollute the code. anyone can tell according to the flag 'ifdef RTE_NET_BOND'. if hiddle inside 'change_bonding_slave_port_status', it will be weird. For example, if the port is not bonding port, It will also invoke 'change_bonding_slave_port_status'. That is unreasonable. > >> +        struct rte_port *port = &ports[port_id]; >> + >> +        /* >> +         * Stopping a bonded port also stops all slaves under the bonded >> +         * device. So if this port is bond device, we need to modify the >> +         * port status of these slaves. >> +         */ >> +        if (port->bond_flag == 1) >> +            return change_bonding_slave_port_status(port_id, true); >> +#endif >> +    } >>       return 0; >>   } >> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h >> index 31f766c965..67f253b30e 100644 >> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h >> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h >> @@ -266,7 +266,8 @@ struct rte_port { >>       uint32_t                mc_addr_nb; /**< nb. of addr. in >> mc_addr_pool */ >>       queueid_t               queue_nb; /**< nb. of queues for flow >> rules */ >>       uint32_t                queue_sz; /**< size of a queue for flow >> rules */ >> -    uint8_t                 slave_flag; /**< bonding slave port */ >> +    uint8_t                 slave_flag : 1, /**< bonding slave port */ >> +                bond_flag : 1; /**< port is bond device */ >>       struct port_template    *pattern_templ_list; /**< Pattern >> templates. */ >>       struct port_template    *actions_templ_list; /**< Actions >> templates. */ >>       struct port_table       *table_list; /**< Flow tables. */ > > .