On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 17:21:42 +0000 Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@amd.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/2022 12:11 PM, madhuker.myt...@oracle.com wrote: > > From: Madhuker Mythri <madhuker.myt...@oracle.com> > > > > Crash occurring while the DPDK secondary processes trying to probe the > > tap-device, where tap-device is a sub-device of Fail-safe device. > > Some-times we get in-valid sub-devices(with the in-valid port-id's), > > due to which the IPC communication does not get response and causes the > > communication failures b/w primary/secondary process. Fix the underlying communication issue. If there is no response then the code is continuing on in an invalid state. Lots more will likely break. > > So, need to validate the sub-device(tap) while secondary process probe in > > the Fail-safe PMD, to avoid such issues. > > > > Bugzilla Id: 1116 > > > > Signed-off-by: Madhuker Mythri <madhuker.myt...@oracle.com> > > --- > > drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c > > b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c > > index 32811403b4..51d4440ac7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c > > @@ -361,6 +361,9 @@ rte_pmd_failsafe_probe(struct rte_vdev_device *vdev) > > if (sdev->devargs.name[0] == '\0') > > continue; > > > > + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(PORT_ID(sdev))) > > + continue; > > + > > > This is in the 'FOREACH_SUBDEV()' block, why an invalid subdevice > provided by the macro? > > Instead of invalid port check, should we fix the macro? > > Overall I am not clear why this defect occurs, bugzilla report also > don't have much detail. > Can you please provide more details why this defect happens? > I am going to reject this patch.
