On 11/19/2019 12:40 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 11/19/19 3:18 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 11/19/2019 9:03 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>> Bonding device should control bonded devices configuration.
>>>
>>> Also avoid usage of slave's data->dev_conf.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 2efb58cbab6e ("bond: new link bonding library")
>>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>> b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>> index 707a0f3cdd..4f0e83205d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>> @@ -1679,6 +1679,7 @@ int
>>> slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev,
>>> struct rte_eth_dev *slave_eth_dev)
>>> {
>>> + struct rte_eth_conf dev_conf;
>>> struct bond_rx_queue *bd_rx_q;
>>> struct bond_tx_queue *bd_tx_q;
>>> uint16_t nb_rx_queues;
>>> @@ -1693,34 +1694,34 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev,
>>> /* Stop slave */
>>> rte_eth_dev_stop(slave_eth_dev->data->port_id);
>>>
>>> + memset(&dev_conf, 0, sizeof(dev_conf));
>>> +
>>> /* Enable interrupts on slave device if supported */
>>> if (slave_eth_dev->data->dev_flags & RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC)
>>> - slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.intr_conf.lsc = 1;
>>> + dev_conf.intr_conf.lsc = 1;
>> I assume the original intention is making incremental changes to the existing
>> slave configuration, if so we should copy the
>> 'slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf' to
>> 'dev_conf' before start updating it.
>
> The problem is that I don't understand how incremental changes
> happen. It simply looks wrong or I don't understand something.
> It looks like it is the only place in bonding where slave configuration
> is done.
>
Hi Chas, Declan,
Can you please check the patch, and if possible comment on the initial intention
of the code?
Thanks,
ferruh
