22.11.4 patches review and test

[Maxime Coquelin]

Hi,

On 1/11/24 07:32, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote:
> Hi Hainlin,
> 
> Thanks very much for test test and report!
> Let me know once any progress with the known issue.
> 
> Thanks,
> Xueming.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Xu, HailinX <hailinx.xu at intel.com>
>> Sent: 1/11/2024 9:42
>> To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl at nvidia.com>; stable at dpdk.org
>> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Abhishek Marathe <Abhishek.Marathe at microsoft.com>; Ali
>> Alnubani <alialnu at nvidia.com>; benjamin.walker at intel.com; David Christensen
>> <drc at linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>;
>> Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes at intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>;
>> Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara at intel.com>; Ju-Hyoung Lee
>> <juhlee at microsoft.com>; Kevin Traynor <ktraynor at redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi
>> <bluca at debian.org>; Pei Zhang <pezhang at redhat.com>; qian.q.xu at intel.com;
>> Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at nvidia.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon
>> (EXTERNAL) <thomas at monjalon.net>; Yanghang Liu <yanghliu at redhat.com>;
>> yuan.peng at intel.com; zhaoyan.chen at intel.com
>> Subject: RE: 22.11.4 patches review and test
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Xueming Li <xuemingl at nvidia.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2023 3:19 PM
>>> To: stable at dpdk.org
>>> Cc: xuemingl at nvidia.com; dev at dpdk.org; Abhishek Marathe
>>> <Abhishek.Marathe at microsoft.com>; Ali Alnubani <alialnu at nvidia.com>;
>>> benjamin.walker at intel.com; David Christensen <drc at linux.vnet.ibm.com>;
>>> Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>; Stokes, Ian
>>> <ian.stokes at intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>; Mcnamara,
>>> John <john.mcnamara at intel.com>; Ju-Hyoung Lee <juhlee at microsoft.com>;
>>> Kevin Traynor <ktraynor at redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian.org>;
>>> Pei Zhang <pezhang at redhat.com>; qian.q.xu at intel.com; Raslan Darawsheh
>>> <rasland at nvidia.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>; Yanghang
>>> Liu <yanghliu at redhat.com>; yuan.peng at intel.com; zhaoyan.chen at intel.com
>>> Subject: 22.11.4 patches review and test
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Here is a list of patches targeted for stable release 22.11.4.
>>>
>>> The planned date for the final release is 5th January.
>>>
>>> Please help with testing and validation of your use cases and report
>>> any issues/results with reply-all to this mail. For the final release
>>> the fixes and reported validations will be added to the release notes.
>>>
>>> A release candidate tarball can be found at:
>>>
>>>      https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/tag/?id=v22.11.4-rc3
>>>
>>> These patches are located at branch 22.11 of dpdk-stable repo:
>>>      https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Xueming Li <xuemingl at nvidia.com>
>>
>> Update the test status for Intel part. dpdk22.11.4-rc3 all validation test done.
>> Found 1 virtio bug.
>>
>> new issue:
>> https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1338: virtio-user can't receive packet:
>> this test only on SPR -Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8490H  --Intel development is
>> investigating
> 
> Maxime, seems the issue related to patch "vhost: fix checking virtqueue access in stats API",
> Could you please take a look?

I will reply in the Bz, but there seems to be 2 backporting issues:

1. We miss the unlock on return 0:

diff --git a/lib/vhost/vhost.c b/lib/vhost/vhost.c
index 4edb76d0dd..6e1bba4391 100644
--- a/lib/vhost/vhost.c
+++ b/lib/vhost/vhost.c
@@ -2070,6 +2070,12 @@ rte_vhost_get_monitor_addr(int vid, uint16_t 
queue_id,
  	if (vq == NULL)
  		return -1;

+	if (!rte_spinlock_trylock(&vq->access_lock))
+		return -1;
+
+	if (unlikely(!vq->access_ok))
+		goto out_unlock;
+
  	if (vq_is_packed(dev)) {
  		struct vring_packed_desc *desc;
  		desc = vq->desc_packed;
@@ -2090,6 +2096,11 @@ rte_vhost_get_monitor_addr(int vid, uint16_t 
queue_id,
  	}

  	return 0; <== We miss an unlock here
+
+out_unlock:
+	rte_spinlock_unlock(&vq->access_lock);
+
+	return -1;
  }

The original patch does it like this:

  	}

-	return 0;
+out_unlock:
+	rte_rwlock_read_unlock(&vq->access_lock);
+
+	return ret;
  }


2. Some unrelated change is introduced:

@@ -2157,6 +2168,7 @@ int rte_vhost_vring_stats_reset(int vid, uint16_t 
queue_id)
  {
  	struct virtio_net *dev = get_device(vid);
  	struct vhost_virtqueue *vq;
+	int ret = 0;

  	if (dev == NULL)
  		return -1;

Above change fixes a build issue introduce in an earlier patch.

How do you want to proceed? Do you want a patch on top of 22.11.4?

Regards,
Maxime

>>
>> # Basic Intel(R) NIC testing
>> * Build & CFLAG compile: cover the build test combination with latest GCC/Clang
>> version and the popular OS revision such as
>>    Ubuntu20.04, Ubuntu22.04, Fedora38, RHEL8.7, RHEL9.2, FreeBSD13.2, SUSE15,
>> CentOS7.9, openEuler22.03-SP1，OpenAnolis8.8 etc.
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>> * PF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including
>> RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN, etc.
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>> * VF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including VF-
>> RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN, etc.
>>
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>> * PF/VF(ice): test scenarios including Switch features/Package Management/Flow
>> Director/Advanced Tx/Advanced RSS/ACL/DCF/Flexible Descriptor, etc.
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>> * Intel NIC single core/NIC performance: test scenarios including PF/VF single
>> core performance test, etc.
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>> * IPsec: test scenarios including ipsec/ipsec-gw/ipsec library basic test -
>> QAT&SW/FIB library, etc.
>> - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>>
>> # Basic cryptodev and virtio testing
>> * Virtio: both function and performance test are covered. Such as
>> PVP/Virtio_loopback/virtio-user loopback/virtio-net VM2VM perf
>> testing/VMAWARE ESXI 8.0, etc.
>> - All test done. found 1 new issue.
>> * Cryptodev:
>>    *Function test: test scenarios including Cryptodev API testing/CompressDev ISA-
>> L/QAT/ZLIB PMD Testing/FIPS, etc.
>>      - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>>    *Performance test: test scenarios including Thoughput Performance/Cryptodev
>> Latency, etc.
>>      - All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Xu, Hailin
>>
>