Hi Harry,
What is the status of this patch?
21/05/2018 11:41, Varghese, Vipin:
> Hi Harry,
>
> This look ok to me, except for one warning rewrite else its ACK from my end.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Van Haaren, Harry
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:26 PM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> > Varghese, Vipin <vipin.vargh...@intel.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH v2] eal/service: improve error checking of coremasks
> >
> > This commit improves the error checking performed on the core masks (or
> > lists)
> > of the service cores, in particular with respect to the data-plane (RTE)
> > cores of
> > DPDK.
> >
> > With this commit, invalid configurations are detected at runtime, and
> > warning
> > messages are printed to inform the user.
> >
> > For example specifying the coremask as 0xf, and the service coremask as
> > 0xff00
> > is invalid as not all service-cores are contained within the coremask. A
> > warning is
> > now printed to inform the user.
> >
> > Reported-by: Vipin Varghese <vipin.vargh...@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > v2, thanks for review:
> > - Consistency in message endings - vs . (Thomas)
> > - Wrap lines as they're very long otherwise (Thomas)
> >
> > Cc: tho...@monjalon.net
> > Cc: vipin.vargh...@intel.com
> >
> > @Thomas, please consider this patch for RC4, it adds checks and prints
> > warnings, better usability, no functional changes.
> > ---
> > lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 43
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> > b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> > index ecebb29..9f3a484 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> > @@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ eal_parse_service_coremask(const char *coremask)
> > unsigned int count = 0;
> > char c;
> > int val;
> > + uint32_t taken_lcore_count = 0;
> >
> > if (coremask == NULL)
> > return -1;
> > @@ -358,6 +359,10 @@ eal_parse_service_coremask(const char *coremask)
> > "lcore %u unavailable\n", idx);
> > return -1;
> > }
> > +
> > + if (cfg->lcore_role[idx] == ROLE_RTE)
> > + taken_lcore_count++;
> > +
> > lcore_config[idx].core_role = ROLE_SERVICE;
> > count++;
> > }
> > @@ -374,11 +379,28 @@ eal_parse_service_coremask(const char *coremask)
> > if (count == 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > + if (core_parsed && taken_lcore_count != count) {
> > + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> > + "Warning: not all service cores were in the coremask. "
> > + "Please ensure -c or -l includes service cores\n");
>
> Current execution will throw warning message as 'Warning: not all service
> cores were in the coremask. Please ensure -c or -l includes service cores'.
>
> 1) Should we re-write this with ' RTE_LOG(WARN, EAL,' and removing 'Warning: '
> 2) Warning message as "service cores not in data plane core mask ".
> 3) If we share information "Please ensure -c or -l includes service cores\n"
> is not it expected to rte_panic? So should we remove this line?
>
> > + }
> > +
> > cfg->service_lcore_count = count;
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > static int
> > +eal_service_cores_parsed(void)
> > +{
> > + int idx;
> > + for (idx = 0; idx < RTE_MAX_LCORE; idx++) {
> > + if (lcore_config[idx].core_role == ROLE_SERVICE)
> > + return 1;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int
> > eal_parse_coremask(const char *coremask) {
> > struct rte_config *cfg = rte_eal_get_configuration(); @@ -387,6
> > +409,11 @@ eal_parse_coremask(const char *coremask)
> > char c;
> > int val;
> >
> > + if (eal_service_cores_parsed())
> > + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> > + "Warning: Service cores parsed before dataplane cores.
> > "
> > + "Please ensure -c is before -s or -S.\n");
> > +
> > if (coremask == NULL)
> > return -1;
> > /* Remove all blank characters ahead and after .
> > @@ -418,6 +445,7 @@ eal_parse_coremask(const char *coremask)
> > "unavailable\n", idx);
> > return -1;
> > }
> > +
> > cfg->lcore_role[idx] = ROLE_RTE;
> > lcore_config[idx].core_index = count;
> > count++;
> > @@ -449,6 +477,7 @@ eal_parse_service_corelist(const char *corelist)
> > unsigned count = 0;
> > char *end = NULL;
> > int min, max;
> > + uint32_t taken_lcore_count = 0;
> >
> > if (corelist == NULL)
> > return -1;
> > @@ -490,6 +519,9 @@ eal_parse_service_corelist(const char *corelist)
> > idx);
> > return -1;
> > }
> > + if (cfg->lcore_role[idx] == ROLE_RTE)
> > + taken_lcore_count++;
> > +
> > lcore_config[idx].core_role =
> > ROLE_SERVICE;
> > count++;
> > @@ -504,6 +536,12 @@ eal_parse_service_corelist(const char *corelist)
> > if (count == 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > + if (core_parsed && taken_lcore_count != count) {
> > + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> > + "Warning: not all service cores were in the coremask. "
> > + "Please ensure -c or -l includes service cores\n");
> > + }
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -516,6 +554,11 @@ eal_parse_corelist(const char *corelist)
> > char *end = NULL;
> > int min, max;
> >
> > + if (eal_service_cores_parsed())
> > + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> > + "Warning: Service cores parsed before dataplane cores.
> > "
> > + "Please ensure -l is before -s or -S.\n");
> > +
> > if (corelist == NULL)
> > return -1;
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
>
