> -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 17:55 > To: Slava Ovsiienko <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: Matan Azrad <[email protected]>; Raslan Darawsheh > <[email protected]>; Ori Kam <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix ConnectX-4LX Tx burst > routines set > > On 1/8/2020 3:50 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: > > Hi, Ferruh > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 16:55 > >> To: Slava Ovsiienko <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >> Cc: Matan Azrad <[email protected]>; Raslan Darawsheh > >> <[email protected]>; Ori Kam <[email protected]>; > >> [email protected]; Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix ConnectX-4LX Tx > >> burst routines set > >> > >> On 1/8/2020 2:53 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > >>> On 12/20/2019 10:48 AM, Viacheslav Ovsiienko wrote: > >>>> The tx_burst routine supporting multi-segment packets with legacy > >>>> MPW and without inline was missed, and there was no valid selection > >>>> for these options, patch adds the missing routine. > >>>> > >>>> Fixes: 82e75f8323bf ("net/mlx5: fix legacy multi-packet Tx > >>>> descriptors") > >>>> Cc: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <[email protected]> > > <...> > > >>>> @@ -5297,6 +5305,7 @@ enum mlx5_txcmp_code { > >>>> DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "port %u has no selected Tx function" > >>>> " for requested offloads %04X", > >>>> dev->data->port_id, olx); > >>>> + assert(false); > > <...> > > > > >> > >>> > >>> I think we should avoid PMDs calling the assert unconditionally, > >>> specially in a code that debug level log is printed. > >>> > >>>> return NULL; > >>>> } > >>>> DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "port %u has selected Tx function" > > > > Yes, I agree. We just do not have the check for the result returned by > > mlx5_select_tx_function(). I think we should check against NULL and > > report an error. "assert" is a temporary solution till this upgrade > > (in debug mode we have a lot of messages and break on assert helps to > > locate the problem quickly, reporting error will do the same). > > > > Can it be possible to drop the patch from mlx tree and prepare a new version > without 'assert'? The selection routine error handling is rather generic and is not merely related to ConnectX-4LX. I propose to prepare the dedicated patch, what do you think?
With best regards, Slava
