Skip to contentSkip to conversation

net/memif: allow stopping and closing device

PATCH Applied Junxiao Shi 3 participants 5 messages Nov 18, 2021 – Nov 24, 2021 Network drivers

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 net/memif: allow stopping and closing device

Bugzilla ID: 888

Fixes febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")
---
 drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +8 -3
index 43d7378329..e3d523af57 100644
@@ -1260,6 +1260,13 @@ memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static int
+memif_dev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
+{
+	memif_disconnect(dev);
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int
 memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 {
@@ -1268,7 +1275,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 
 	if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
 		memif_msg_enq_disconnect(pmd->cc, "Device closed", 0);
-		memif_disconnect(dev);
 
 		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
 			(*dev->dev_ops->rx_queue_release)(dev, i);
@@ -1276,8 +1282,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 			(*dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_release)(dev, i);
 
 		memif_socket_remove_device(dev);
-	} else {
-		memif_disconnect(dev);
 	}
 
 	rte_free(dev->process_private);
@@ -1515,6 +1519,7 @@ memif_rx_queue_intr_disable(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t qid __rte_unused)
 
 static const struct eth_dev_ops ops = {
 	.dev_start = memif_dev_start,
+	.dev_stop = memif_dev_stop,
 	.dev_close = memif_dev_close,
 	.dev_infos_get = memif_dev_info,
 	.dev_configure = memif_dev_configure,
Signature · 1 line
2.17.1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 4 lines · Junxiao Shi

Bugzilla ID: 888

Fixes febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")

Thanks Junxiao, +1 to this fix, cc'ed memif maintainer Jakub.

Quoted 9 lines
---
  drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c | 11 ++++++++---
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +0 -0
index 43d7378329..e3d523af57 100644

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) · line 1266

Quoted 7 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +4 -0
@@ -1260,6 +1260,13 @@ memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
  	return ret;
  }
 
+static int
+memif_dev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
+{
+	memif_disconnect(dev);

Is the 'memif_dev_stop()' safe to be called multiple times?
If 'memif_dev_close()' calls 'memif_dev_stop()' (see below), it is possible to call 'memif_dev_stop()' multiple times, so it should be protected.

Quoted 15 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +3 -1
+	return 0;
+}
+
  static int
  memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
  {
@@ -1268,7 +1275,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 
  	if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
  		memif_msg_enq_disconnect(pmd->cc, "Device closed", 0);
-		memif_disconnect(dev);
 
  		for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
  			(*dev->dev_ops->rx_queue_release)(dev, i);

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) · line 1280

Quoted 5 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +0 -2
@@ -1276,8 +1282,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
  			(*dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_release)(dev, i);
 
  		memif_socket_remove_device(dev);
-	} else {
-		memif_disconnect(dev);

Should we add 'memif_dev_stop()' within the close function? Otherwise we are relying on user to stop, but at least in remove path ('rte_pmd_memif_remove()') that may not be the case.

Quoted 12 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +1 -0
  	}
 
  	rte_free(dev->process_private);
@@ -1515,6 +1519,7 @@ memif_rx_queue_intr_disable(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t qid __rte_unused)
 
  static const struct eth_dev_ops ops = {
  	.dev_start = memif_dev_start,
+	.dev_stop = memif_dev_stop,
  	.dev_close = memif_dev_close,
  	.dev_infos_get = memif_dev_info,
  	.dev_configure = memif_dev_configure,
#2 lore raw

Hi Ferruh

You have to rely on user to call stop before calling close/remove. This is mandated in ethdev library, as implemented in:
febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")

Yours, Junxiao

Quoted 70 lines · On Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 06:02 Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 4 lines · Junxiao Shi

Bugzilla ID: 888

Fixes febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")

Thanks Junxiao, +1 to this fix, cc'ed memif maintainer Jakub.

Review

Quoted 5 lines
---
  drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c | 11 ++++++++---
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0

b/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) · line 1266

Quoted 11 lines

index 43d7378329..e3d523af57 100644

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +4 -0
@@ -1260,6 +1260,13 @@ memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
      return ret;
  }
 
+static int
+memif_dev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
+{
+     memif_disconnect(dev);

Is the 'memif_dev_stop()' safe to be called multiple times?
If 'memif_dev_close()' calls 'memif_dev_stop()' (see below), it is possible to call 'memif_dev_stop()' multiple times, so it should be protected.

Quoted 15 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +3 -1
+     return 0;
+}
+
  static int
  memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
  {
@@ -1268,7 +1275,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 
      if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
              memif_msg_enq_disconnect(pmd->cc, "Device closed", 0);
-             memif_disconnect(dev);
 
              for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
                      (*dev->dev_ops->rx_queue_release)(dev, i);

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) · line 1280

Quoted 5 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +0 -2
@@ -1276,8 +1282,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
                      (*dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_release)(dev, i);
 
              memif_socket_remove_device(dev);
-     } else {
-             memif_disconnect(dev);

Should we add 'memif_dev_stop()' within the close function? Otherwise we are relying on user to stop, but at least in remove path ('rte_pmd_memif_remove()') that may not be the case.

drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c memif_rx_queue_intr_disable(struct rte_eth_dev

Quoted 4 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +0 -0
      }
 
      rte_free(dev->process_private);
@@ -1515,6 +1519,7 @@ memif_rx_queue_intr_disable(struct rte_eth_dev

*dev, uint16_t qid __rte_unused)

Quoted 8 lines
drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c +1 -0
  static const struct eth_dev_ops ops = {
      .dev_start = memif_dev_start,
+     .dev_stop = memif_dev_stop,
      .dev_close = memif_dev_close,
      .dev_infos_get = memif_dev_info,
      .dev_configure = memif_dev_configure,
 
#3 lore raw

On 11/24/2021 2:01 PM, yoursunny wrote:

Hi Junxiao, comment moved down, please don't top post, it makes following the discussion very hard in the archive.

Quoted 59 lines

Yours, Junxiao

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 06:02 Ferruh Yigit <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 11/18/2021 5:33 PM, Junxiao Shi wrote:
     > Bugzilla ID: 888
     > Fixes: febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")
     >
     > Signed-off-by: Junxiao Shi <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>

    Thanks Junxiao, +1 to this fix, cc'ed memif maintainer Jakub.

     > ---
     >   drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c | 11 ++++++++---
     >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
     >
     > diff --git a/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c b/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c
     > index 43d7378329..e3d523af57 100644
     > --- a/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c
     > +++ b/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c
     > @@ -1260,6 +1260,13 @@ memif_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
     >       return ret;
     >   }
     >
     > +static int
     > +memif_dev_stop(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
     > +{
     > +     memif_disconnect(dev);

    Is the 'memif_dev_stop()' safe to be called multiple times?
    If 'memif_dev_close()' calls 'memif_dev_stop()' (see below), it is possible
    to call 'memif_dev_stop()' multiple times, so it should be protected.

     > +     return 0;
     > +}
     > +
     >   static int
     >   memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
     >   {
     > @@ -1268,7 +1275,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
     >
     >       if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
     >               memif_msg_enq_disconnect(pmd->cc, "Device closed", 0);
     > -             memif_disconnect(dev);
     >
     >               for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++)
     >                       (*dev->dev_ops->rx_queue_release)(dev, i);
     > @@ -1276,8 +1282,6 @@ memif_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
     >                       (*dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_release)(dev, i);
     >
     >               memif_socket_remove_device(dev);
     > -     } else {
     > -             memif_disconnect(dev);

    Should we add 'memif_dev_stop()' within the close function?
    Otherwise we are relying on user to stop, but at least in remove path
    ('rte_pmd_memif_remove()') that may not be the case.
Quoted 6 lines

Hi Ferruh

You have to rely on user to call stop before calling close/remove. This is mandated in ethdev library, as implemented in:
febc855b358e ("ethdev: forbid closing started device")

Yes it is enforced,
and 'rte_pmd_memif_remove()' calls 'rte_eth_dev_close()' instead of 'memif_dev_close()', so agree that it won't mean much to add stop() within close().

I will proceed with the patch without waiting review from Jakup to have it in the release.

Quoted 13 lines
     >       }
     >
     >       rte_free(dev->process_private);
     > @@ -1515,6 +1519,7 @@ memif_rx_queue_intr_disable(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t qid __rte_unused)
     >
     >   static const struct eth_dev_ops ops = {
     >       .dev_start = memif_dev_start,
     > +     .dev_stop = memif_dev_stop,
     >       .dev_close = memif_dev_close,
     >       .dev_infos_get = memif_dev_info,
     >       .dev_configure = memif_dev_configure,
     >