On 2015/03/13 19:14, Iremonger, Bernard wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tetsuya Mukawa [mailto:mukawa at igel.co.jp] >> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 12:11 AM >> To: Iremonger, Bernard >> Cc: John W. Linville; dev at dpdk.org >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] af_packet: support port hotplug >> >> 2015-03-13 2:05 GMT+09:00 Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremonger at >> intel.com>: >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of John W. Linville >>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 6:36 PM >>>> To: dev at dpdk.org >>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] af_packet: support port hotplug >>>> >>>> This patch adds finalization code to free resources allocated by the >>>> PMD. This is based on earlier patches for other PMDs by Tetsuya >>>> Mukawa <mukawa at igel.co.jp>, with corrections related to data- >>>>> name. >>>> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville at tuxdriver.com> >>>> Cc: Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa at igel.co.jp> >>>> --- >>>> lib/librte_pmd_af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c | 56 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_pmd_af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c >>>> b/lib/librte_pmd_af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c >>>> index 80e9bdf7f819..57998ab19c96 100644 >>>> --- a/lib/librte_pmd_af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c >>>> +++ b/lib/librte_pmd_af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c >>>> @@ -399,6 +399,13 @@ static struct eth_dev_ops ops = { >>>> .stats_reset = eth_stats_reset, }; >>>> >>>> +static struct eth_driver rte_af_packet_pmd = { >>>> + .pci_drv = { >>>> + .name = "rte_af_packet_pmd", >>>> + .drv_flags = RTE_PCI_DRV_DETACHABLE, >>>> + }, >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> /* >>>> * Opens an AF_PACKET socket >>>> */ >>>> @@ -653,6 +660,10 @@ rte_pmd_init_internals(const char *name, >>>> if (*eth_dev == NULL) >>>> goto error; >>>> >>>> + /* check length of device name */ >>>> + if ((strlen((*eth_dev)->data->name) + 1) > sizeof(data->name)) >>>> + goto error; >>>> + >>>> /* >>>> * now put it all together >>>> * - store queue data in internals, @@ -669,12 +680,14 @@ >>>> rte_pmd_init_internals(const char *name, >>>> data->nb_tx_queues = (uint16_t)nb_queues; >>>> data->dev_link = pmd_link; >>>> data->mac_addrs = &(*internals)->eth_addr; >>>> + strncpy(data->name, (*eth_dev)->data->name, >>>> +strlen((*eth_dev)->data->name)); >>>> >>>> pci_dev->numa_node = numa_node; >>>> >>>> (*eth_dev)->data = data; >>>> (*eth_dev)->dev_ops = &ops; >>>> (*eth_dev)->pci_dev = pci_dev; >>>> + (*eth_dev)->driver = &rte_af_packet_pmd; >>>> >>>> return 0; >>>> >>>> @@ -835,10 +848,53 @@ rte_pmd_af_packet_devinit(const char *name, const >>>> char *params) >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static int >>>> +rte_pmd_af_packet_devuninit(const char *name) { >>>> + struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev = NULL; >>>> + struct pmd_internals *internals; >>>> + struct tpacket_req req; >>>> + >>>> + unsigned q; >>>> + >>>> + RTE_LOG(INFO, PMD, "Closing AF_PACKET ethdev on numa socket %u\n", >>>> + rte_socket_id()); >>>> + >>>> + if (name == NULL) >>>> + return -1; >>> Hi Tetsuya, John, >>> >>> Before detaching a port, the port must be stopped and closed. >>> The stop and close are only allowed for RTE_PROC_PRIMARY. >>> Should there be a check for process_type here? >>> >>> if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) >>> return -EPERM; >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Bernard >>> >> Hi Bernard, >> >> I agree with stop() and close() are only called by primary process, but it >> may not need to add like >> above. >> Could you please check rte_ethdev.c? >> >> - struct rte_eth_dev_data *rte_eth_dev_data; This array is shared between >> processes. >> So we need to initialize of finalize carefully like you said. >> >> - struct rte_eth_dev rte_eth_devices[] >> This array is per process. >> And 'data' variable of this structure indicates a pointer of >> rte_eth_dev_data. >> >> All PMDs for physical NIC allocates like above when PMDs are initialized. >> (Even when a process is secondary, initialization function of PMDs will be >> called) But virtual device >> PMDs allocate rte_eth_dev_data and overwrite 'data' >> variable of rte_eth_devices while initialization. >> >> As a result, primary and secondary process has their own 'rte_eth_dev_data' >> for a virtual device. >> So I guess all processes need to free it not to leak memory. >> >> Thanks, >> Tetsuya >> > Hi Tetsuya, > > In rte_ethdev.c both rte_eth_dev_stop() and rte_eth_dev_close() use the > macro PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET(). > So for secondary processes both functions return without doing anything. > Maybe this check should be added to rte_eth_dev_attach() and > rte_eth_dev_detach() ? > > For the Physical/Virtual Functions of the NIC a lot of the finalization is > done in the dev->dev_ops->dev_stop() and > dev->dev_ops->dev_close() functions. To complete the finalization the > dev_uninit() function is called, this should probably do nothing for > secondary processes as the dev_stop() and dev_close() functions will not > have been executed.
Hi Bernard, Sorry for my English. I meant 'virtual device PMD' as PMDs like pcap or af_packet PMDs. Not a PMDs for virtual functions on NIC. For PMDs like a pcap and af_packet PMDs, all data structures are allocated per processes. (Actually I guess nothing is shared between primary and secondary processes, because rte_eth_dev_data is overwritten by each processes.) So we need to free per process data when detach() is called. > For the Physical/Virtual Functions of the NIC the dev_init() is called for > both primary and secondary processes, however a subset of the function only > is executed for secondary processes. Because of above, we probably not be able to add PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET() to rte_eth_dev_detach(). But I agree we should not call rte_eth_dev_detach() for secondary process, if PMDs are like e1000 or ixgbe PMD. To work like above, how about changing drv_flags dynamically in close() callback? For example, when primary process calls rte_eth_dev_close(), a callback of PMD will be called. (In the case of e1000 PMD, eth_em_close() is the callback.) At that time, specify RTE_PCI_DRV_DETACHABLE flag to drv_flag in the callback. It means if primary process hasn't called close() yet, rte_eth_dev_detach() will do nothing and return error. How about doing like above? Regards, Tetsuya > Regards, > > Bernard. > > > > > > >