ethdev: fix rte_eth_dev_owner_unset
Checks
Commit Message
The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because
it always returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned)
value is flagged as not valid.
Move the validation of owner into set and unset as
separate calls.
Fixes: 5b7ba31148a8 ("ethdev: add port ownership")
Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
---
lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 10 ++++++----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Comments
Hi Stephen
From: Stephen Hemminger
> The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always
> returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is flagged as not
> valid.
>
It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device.
It means that unset owner should be called for owned device.
> Move the validation of owner into set and unset as separate calls.
>
> Fixes: 5b7ba31148a8 ("ethdev: add port ownership")
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> ---
> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> index 4c320250589a..9398550a1189 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> @@ -443,10 +443,6 @@ _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(const uint16_t port_id,
> const uint64_t old_owner_id,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> - if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) &&
> - !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> port_owner = &rte_eth_devices[port_id].data->owner;
> if (port_owner->id != old_owner_id) {
> RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,
> @@ -475,6 +471,9 @@ rte_eth_dev_owner_set(const uint16_t port_id, {
> int ret;
>
> + if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(owner->id))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> rte_eth_dev_shared_data_prepare();
>
> rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_eth_dev_shared_data->ownership_lock);
> @@ -492,6 +491,9 @@ rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(const uint16_t port_id,
> const uint64_t owner_id)
> {.id = RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER, .name = ""};
> int ret;
>
> + if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(owner_id))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> rte_eth_dev_shared_data_prepare();
>
> rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_eth_dev_shared_data->ownership_lock);
> --
> 2.18.0
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 05:52:20 +0000
Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com> wrote:
> Hi Stephen
>
> From: Stephen Hemminger
> > The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always
> > returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is flagged as not
> > valid.
> >
>
> It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device.
> It means that unset owner should be called for owned device.
>
Original code was broken. The following would always fail.
rte_eth_dev_owner_new(&owner.id);
sprintf(owner.name, "example");
rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, &owner);
rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner.id);
That is because of:
rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner_id)
_rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, owner_id, &new_owner) << new_owner.id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (0)
if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) && << new_owner->id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (which is flagged as invalid)
!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
return -EINVAL;
The failsafe driver never checks the return value, and therefore doesn't see that it never clears ownership.
Hi Stephen
From: Stephen Hemminger
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 05:52:20 +0000
> Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Stephen
> >
> > From: Stephen Hemminger
> > > The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always
> > > returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is
> > > flagged as not valid.
> > >
> >
> > It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device.
> > It means that unset owner should be called for owned device.
> >
>
> Original code was broken. The following would always fail.
>
> rte_eth_dev_owner_new(&owner.id);
> sprintf(owner.name, "example");
> rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, &owner);
> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner.id);
>
> That is because of:
> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner_id)
> _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, owner_id, &new_owner)
> << new_owner.id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (0)
>
>
> if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) && <<
> new_owner->id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (which is flagged as invalid)
> !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
> return -EINVAL;
>
But both should be invalid the new owner and the old owner(&&) to raise an EINVAL error.
In the aforementioned check above the old owner should be valid.
> The failsafe driver never checks the return value, and therefore doesn't see
> that it never clears ownership.
On 8/14/2018 8:46 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> Hi Stephen
>
> From: Stephen Hemminger
>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 05:52:20 +0000
>> Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Stephen
>>>
>>> From: Stephen Hemminger
>>>> The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always
>>>> returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is
>>>> flagged as not valid.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device.
>>> It means that unset owner should be called for owned device.
>>>
>>
>> Original code was broken. The following would always fail.
>>
>> rte_eth_dev_owner_new(&owner.id);
>> sprintf(owner.name, "example");
>> rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, &owner);
>> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner.id);
>>
>> That is because of:
>> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner_id)
>> _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, owner_id, &new_owner)
>> << new_owner.id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (0)
>>
>>
>> if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) && <<
>> new_owner->id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (which is flagged as invalid)
>> !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>
> But both should be invalid the new owner and the old owner(&&) to raise an EINVAL error.
>
> In the aforementioned check above the old owner should be valid.
It looks rte_eth_dev_owner_unset() works, updating patch as rejected.
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:55:56 +0100
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> On 8/14/2018 8:46 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > Hi Stephen
> >
> > From: Stephen Hemminger
> >> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 05:52:20 +0000
> >> Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Stephen
> >>>
> >>> From: Stephen Hemminger
> >>>> The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always
> >>>> returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is
> >>>> flagged as not valid.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device.
> >>> It means that unset owner should be called for owned device.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Original code was broken. The following would always fail.
> >>
> >> rte_eth_dev_owner_new(&owner.id);
> >> sprintf(owner.name, "example");
> >> rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, &owner);
> >> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner.id);
> >>
> >> That is because of:
> >> rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner_id)
> >> _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, owner_id, &new_owner)
> >> << new_owner.id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (0)
> >>
> >>
> >> if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) && <<
> >> new_owner->id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (which is flagged as invalid)
> >> !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
> >> return -EINVAL;
> >>
> >
> > But both should be invalid the new owner and the old owner(&&) to raise an EINVAL error.
> >
> > In the aforementioned check above the old owner should be valid.
>
> It looks rte_eth_dev_owner_unset() works, updating patch as rejected.
>
The issue was the incorrect log message, addressed in later patches.
@@ -443,10 +443,6 @@ _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(const uint16_t port_id, const uint64_t old_owner_id,
return -ENODEV;
}
- if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) &&
- !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id))
- return -EINVAL;
-
port_owner = &rte_eth_devices[port_id].data->owner;
if (port_owner->id != old_owner_id) {
RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,
@@ -475,6 +471,9 @@ rte_eth_dev_owner_set(const uint16_t port_id,
{
int ret;
+ if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(owner->id))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
rte_eth_dev_shared_data_prepare();
rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_eth_dev_shared_data->ownership_lock);
@@ -492,6 +491,9 @@ rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(const uint16_t port_id, const uint64_t owner_id)
{.id = RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER, .name = ""};
int ret;
+ if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(owner_id))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
rte_eth_dev_shared_data_prepare();
rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_eth_dev_shared_data->ownership_lock);