Hi Matan,
I'n not fond of the commit title, how about:
[PATCH v3 3/8] net/failsafe: add probed etherdev capture
?
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:47:28PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> Previous fail-safe code didn't support getting probed sub-devices and
> failed when it tried to probe them.
>
> Skip fail-safe sub-device probing when it already was probed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <ma...@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.ri...@6wind.com>
> ---
> doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst | 5 ++++
> drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_eal.c | 60
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst b/doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst
> index 5b1b47e..b89e53b 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst
> @@ -115,6 +115,11 @@ Fail-safe command line parameters
> order to take only the last line into account (unlike ``exec()``) at every
> probe attempt.
>
> +.. note::
> +
> + In case of whitelist sub-device probed by EAL, fail-safe PMD will take
> the device
> + as is, which means that EAL device options are taken in this case.
> +
> - **mac** parameter [MAC address]
>
> This parameter allows the user to set a default MAC address to the
> fail-safe
> diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_eal.c
> b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_eal.c
> index 19d26f5..7bc7453 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_eal.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_eal.c
> @@ -36,39 +36,59 @@
> #include "failsafe_private.h"
>
> static int
> +fs_get_port_by_device_name(const char *name, uint16_t *port_id)
The naming convention for the failsafe driver is
namespace_object_sub-object_action()
With an ordering of objects by their scope (std, rte, failsafe, file).
Also, "get" as an action is not descriptive enough.
static int
fs_ethdev_capture(const char *name, uint16_t *port_id);
> +{
> + uint16_t pid;
> + size_t len;
> +
> + if (name == NULL) {
> + DEBUG("Null pointer is specified\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + len = strlen(name);
> + RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(pid) {
> + if (!strncmp(name, rte_eth_devices[pid].device->name, len)) {
> + *port_id = pid;
> + return 0;
> + }
> + }
> + return -ENODEV;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> fs_bus_init(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> {
> struct sub_device *sdev;
> struct rte_devargs *da;
> uint8_t i;
> - uint16_t j;
> + uint16_t pid;
> int ret;
>
> FOREACH_SUBDEV(sdev, i, dev) {
> if (sdev->state != DEV_PARSED)
> continue;
> da = &sdev->devargs;
> - ret = rte_eal_hotplug_add(da->bus->name,
> - da->name,
> - da->args);
> - if (ret) {
> - ERROR("sub_device %d probe failed %s%s%s", i,
> - rte_errno ? "(" : "",
> - rte_errno ? strerror(rte_errno) : "",
> - rte_errno ? ")" : "");
> - continue;
> - }
> - RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(j) {
> - if (strcmp(rte_eth_devices[j].device->name,
> - da->name) == 0) {
> - ETH(sdev) = &rte_eth_devices[j];
> - break;
> + if (fs_get_port_by_device_name(da->name, &pid) != 0) {
> + ret = rte_eal_hotplug_add(da->bus->name,
> + da->name,
> + da->args);
> + if (ret) {
> + ERROR("sub_device %d probe failed %s%s%s", i,
> + rte_errno ? "(" : "",
> + rte_errno ? strerror(rte_errno) : "",
> + rte_errno ? ")" : "");
> + continue;
> }
> + if (fs_get_port_by_device_name(da->name, &pid) != 0) {
> + ERROR("sub_device %d init went wrong", i);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + } else {
> + /* Take control of device probed by EAL options. */
> + DEBUG("Taking control of a probed sub device"
> + " %d named %s", i, da->name);
In this case, the devargs of the probed device must be copied within the
sub-device definition and removed from the EAL using the proper
rte_devargs API.
Note that there is no rte_devargs copy function. You can use
rte_devargs_parse instead, "parsing" again the original devargs into the
sub-device one. It is necessary for complying with internal rte_devargs
requirements (da->args being malloc-ed, at the moment, but may evolve).
The rte_eal_devargs_parse function is not easy enough to use right now,
you will have to build a devargs string (using snprintf) and submit it.
I proposed a change this release for it but it will not make it for
18.02, that would have simplified your implementation.
--
Gaëtan Rivet
6WIND
