Hi Ian, On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Stokes, Ian <ian.sto...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Mauricio, > > This patch is quite useful. Some minor comments inline. I've also tested > the patch and can confirm it works without issue. > Great! > > Thanks > Ian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@openvswitch.org] On Behalf Of Mauricio > > Vasquez B > > Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 9:52 AM > > To: dev@openvswitch.org > > Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] netdev-dpdk: add hotplug support > > > > In order to use dpdk ports in ovs they have to be bound to a DPDK > > compatible driver before ovs is started. > > > > This patch adds the possibility to hotplug (or hot-unplug) a device > > after ovs has been started. The implementation adds an appctl command: > > netdev-dpdk/port-clt > > > > After the user attaches a new device, it has to be added to a bridge > > using the to use the add-port command, similarly, before detaching a > > device, it has to be removed using the del-port command. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauricio Vasquez B > > <mauricio.vasquezber...@studenti.polito.it> > > --- > > lib/netdev-dpdk.c | 73 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c index > > 7c4cd07..05fa0df 100644 > > --- a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c > > +++ b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c > > @@ -1982,6 +1982,75 @@ netdev_dpdk_set_admin_state(struct unixctl_conn > > *conn, int argc, > > unixctl_command_reply(conn, "OK"); > > } > > > > +static void > > +netdev_dpdk_port_ctl(struct unixctl_conn *conn, int argc OVS_UNUSED, > > + const char *argv[], void *aux OVS_UNUSED) { > > + int ret; > > + uint8_t port_id; > > + unsigned int parsed_port; > > + char devname[RTE_ETH_NAME_MAX_LEN]; > > + char response[512]; > > + > > + ovs_mutex_lock(&dpdk_mutex); > > + > > + if (strcmp(argv[1], "attach") == 0) { > > + ret = rte_eth_dev_attach(argv[2], &port_id); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "Error attaching device '%s'", argv[2]); > > + unixctl_command_reply_error(conn, response); > > + goto unlock; > > + } > > + > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "Device '%s' has been attached as 'dpdk%d'", argv[2], > > port_id); > > + unixctl_command_reply(conn, response); > > + > > + } else if (strcmp(argv[1], "detach") == 0) { > > + ret = dpdk_dev_parse_name(argv[2], "dpdk", &parsed_port); > > + if (ret) { > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "'%s' is not a valid dpdk device", argv[2]); > > + unixctl_command_reply_error(conn, response); > > + goto unlock; > > + } > > + > > + port_id = parsed_port; > > + > > Very minor style change here, the extra space between '*' and 'netdev' > below can be removed. > I will correct it in a future v2. > > > + struct netdev * netdev = netdev_from_name(argv[2]); > > + if (netdev) { > > So we should only enter here if the netdev device exists? > Yes, it is because if the device is being used it can not be detached because it will cause a crash on the PMD threads that are using the device. > However is there a specific reason you call netdev_close() before > reporting the device is busy? > I've tested with and without the call below and didn’t notice any > functional difference; the port was still able to send/receive traffic. > In the case the device is busy, is it required? If busy should the device > be left as is and the reply error logged? > netdev_from_name() increases the count reference for that device, then netdev_close() is called just to decrease the ref_cnt to the original value avoiding a memory leakage. > > > + netdev_close(netdev); > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "Port '%s' is being used. Remove it before > > detaching", > > + argv[2]); > > + unixctl_command_reply_error(conn, response); > > + goto unlock; > > + } > > + > > + rte_eth_dev_close(port_id); > > + > > + ret = rte_eth_dev_detach(port_id, devname); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "Port '%s' can not be detached", argv[2]); > > + unixctl_command_reply_error(conn, response); > > + goto unlock; > > + } > > + > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "Port '%s' has been detached", argv[2]); > > + unixctl_command_reply(conn, response); > > + } else { > > + snprintf(response, sizeof(response), > > + "'%s' is not a valid argument", argv[1]); > > + unixctl_command_reply_error(conn, response); > > + } > > + > > +unlock: > > + ovs_mutex_unlock(&dpdk_mutex); > > +} > > + > > /* > > * Set virtqueue flags so that we do not receive interrupts. > > */ > > @@ -2262,6 +2331,10 @@ dpdk_common_init(void) > > "[netdev] up|down", 1, 2, > > netdev_dpdk_set_admin_state, NULL); > > > > + unixctl_command_register("netdev-dpdk/port-ctl", > > + "attach/detach device", 2, 2, > > + netdev_dpdk_port_ctl, NULL); > > + > > ovs_thread_create("dpdk_watchdog", dpdk_watchdog, NULL); } > > > > -- > > 1.9.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > dev@openvswitch.org > > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > Thanks for the feedback, Mauricio Vasquez, _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
