[dpdk-dev] [PATCH V20 4/4] app/testpmd: show example to handler hot unplug

Matan Azrad matan at mellanox.com
Thu May 3 09:25:49 CEST 2018


Hi Jeff

> From: Jeff Guo, Wednesday, April 18, 2018 4:38 PM
> Use testpmd for example, to show how an application smoothly handle
> failure when device being hot unplug. Once app detect the removal event,
> the callback would be called, it first stop the packet forwarding, then stop the
> port, close the port and finally detach the port.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Guo <jia.guo at intel.com>
> ---
> v20->v19:
> remove the auto binding example.
> ---
>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
> 5986ff7..3751901 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> @@ -1125,6 +1125,9 @@ run_pkt_fwd_on_lcore(struct fwd_lcore *fc,
> packet_fwd_t pkt_fwd)
>  	tics_datum = rte_rdtsc();
>  	tics_per_1sec = rte_get_timer_hz();
>  #endif
> +	if (hot_plug)
> +		rte_dev_handle_hot_unplug();
> +

Again, I don't understand why the application should configure it - it already started the hot-plug,
Can't the EAL handle this automatically when the user starts the hot-plug?

>  	fsm = &fwd_streams[fc->stream_idx];
>  	nb_fs = fc->stream_nb;
>  	do {
> @@ -2069,6 +2072,26 @@ rmv_event_callback(void *arg)
>  			dev->device->name);
>  }
> 
> +static void
> +rmv_dev_event_callback(char *dev_name)
> +{
> +	uint16_t port_id;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = rte_eth_dev_get_port_by_name(dev_name, &port_id);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		printf("can not get port by device %s!\n", dev_name);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_RET(port_id);
> +	printf("removing port id:%u\n", port_id);
> +	stop_packet_forwarding();
> +	stop_port(port_id);
> +	close_port(port_id);
> +	detach_port(port_id);
> +}

We have also the rmv_event_callback() which is triggered by a RMV interrupt and running by the host thread.
What is the context thread of rmv_dev_event_callback()?
Shouldn't they be synchronized? Should we need both in the same time?

> +
>  /* This function is used by the interrupt thread */  static int
> eth_event_callback(portid_t port_id, enum rte_eth_event_type type, void
> *param, @@ -2130,9 +2153,7 @@ eth_dev_event_callback(char
> *device_name, enum rte_dev_event_type type,
>  	case RTE_DEV_EVENT_REMOVE:
>  		RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "The device: %s has been removed!\n",
>  			device_name);
> -		/* TODO: After finish failure handle, begin to stop
> -		 * packet forward, stop port, close port, detach port.
> -		 */
> +		rmv_dev_event_callback(device_name);
>  		break;
>  	case RTE_DEV_EVENT_ADD:
>  		RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "The device: %s has been added!\n",
> @@ -2640,7 +2661,7 @@ main(int argc, char** argv)
>  			return -1;
>  		}
>  		eth_dev_event_callback_register();
> -
> +		rte_dev_handle_hot_unplug();
>  	}
> 
>  	if (start_port(RTE_PORT_ALL) != 0)
> --
> 2.7.4



More information about the dev mailing list