24/09/2020 14:07, Ferruh Yigit: > On 9/23/2020 9:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 23/09/2020 18:45, Ferruh Yigit: > >> On 9/13/2020 11:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>> Since rte_eth_dev_release_port() is called on all port close operations, > >>> the event RTE_ETH_EVENT_DESTROY can be reliably used for resetting > >>> the port status on the application side. > >>> > >>> The intermediate state RTE_PORT_HANDLING is removed in close_port() > >>> because a port can also be closed by a PMD in a device remove operation. > >>> > >>> In case multiple ports are closed, calling remove_invalid_ports() > >>> only once is enough. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > >> > >> <...> > >> > >>> @@ -3118,6 +3093,13 @@ eth_event_callback(portid_t port_id, enum > >>> rte_eth_event_type type, void *param, > >>> rmv_port_callback, (void > >>> *)(intptr_t)port_id)) > >>> fprintf(stderr, "Could not set up deferred > >>> device removal\n"); > >>> break; > >>> + case RTE_ETH_EVENT_DESTROY: > >>> + if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(ports[port_id].port_status), > >>> + RTE_PORT_STOPPED, > >>> + RTE_PORT_CLOSED) == 0) > >>> + printf("Port %d cannot be set to closed\n", port_id); > >>> + printf("Port %u is closed\n", port_id); > >>> + break; > >> > >> This is failing if a port closed without application port stop command, > >> PMD may be doing port stop within the close function but since > >> application didn't give the stop command, the port status is not > >> 'RTE_PORT_STOPPED', hence 'port_status' is not updated correctly. > > > > Do you think we should give up with the atomic state transition, > > and just assign the state as closed? > > > > It can be better, if the DESTROY event received it should be in closed > state.
I don't understand your proposal. Note that we are not managing ethdev states here. Despite the misleading RTE prefix, it is a testpmd state. > Right now device can be hot removed while running, or it may be closed > before it has been stopped, both cases state transition assumption from > stopped->closed will be wrong, and final state will be wrong. I think we should force the state, not matter what it was before.