On 4/29/2022 7:52 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
Hi, Ferruh,
在 2022/4/27 2:19, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
On 3/24/2022 3:00 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
From: Huisong Li <lihuis...@huawei.com>
All slaves will be stopped and removed when closing a bonded port.
But the
while loop can not stop if both rte_eth_dev_stop and
rte_eth_bond_slave_remove fail to run.
Agree that this is a defect introduced in below commit. Thanks for the
fix.
thanks.
Fixes: fb0379bc5db3 ("net/bonding: check stop call status")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuis...@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humi...@huawei.com>
---
drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
index 469dc71170..00d4deda44 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
@@ -2149,13 +2149,14 @@ bond_ethdev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
return 0;
RTE_BOND_LOG(INFO, "Closing bonded device %s", dev->device->name);
- while (internals->slave_count != skipped) {
+ while (skipped < internals->slave_count) {
When below fixed with adding 'continue', no need to change the check,
right? Although new one is also correct.
Agreed.
uint16_t port_id = internals->slaves[skipped].port_id;
if (rte_eth_dev_stop(port_id) != 0) {
RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, "Failed to stop device on port %u",
port_id);
skipped++;
+ continue;
Can't we remove the slave even if 'stop()' failed? If so I think
better to just log the error and keep continue in that case, what do
you think?
NO, if slave stop failed, we cannot remove the slave.
Got it, thanks for clarification.
just see the function stack:
rte_eth_bond_slave_remove
__eth_bond_slave_remove_lock_free
slave_remove
rte_eth_dev_internal_reset
if (dev->data->dev_started) {
RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Port %u must be stopped to allow reset\n",
dev->data->port_id);
return;
}
}
if (rte_eth_bond_slave_remove(bond_port_id, port_id) != 0) {
.
