| Message ID | 20220922124011.1341381-1-michael.phelan@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [ovs-dev,branch-2.16,v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| ovsrobot/github-robot-_Build_and_Test | fail | github build: failed |
| ovsrobot/intel-ovs-compilation | success | test: success |
Bleep bloop. Greetings Michael Phelan, I am a robot and I have tried out your patch.
Thanks for your contribution.
I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below.
checkpatch:
WARNING: Line is 102 characters long (recommended limit is 79)
#97 FILE: NEWS:11:
https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/.
Lines checked: 110, Warnings: 1, Errors: 0
Please check this out. If you feel there has been an error, please email aconole@redhat.com
Thanks,
0-day Robot
On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: > Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. > > A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. > If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.6. > > [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/ > Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> > For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does not like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. It is working fine with 20.11.4. Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see failures here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these failures need to checked. [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 [4] https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date.html > --- > v2: > - Update recommended DPDK version for older OvS versions in Documentation. > > --- > --- > .ci/linux-build.sh | 2 +- > Documentation/faq/releases.rst | 8 ++++---- > Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst | 8 ++++---- > NEWS | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/.ci/linux-build.sh b/.ci/linux-build.sh > index c06e88c57..dd0a57850 100755 > --- a/.ci/linux-build.sh > +++ b/.ci/linux-build.sh > @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ fi > > if [ "$DPDK" ] || [ "$DPDK_SHARED" ]; then > if [ -z "$DPDK_VER" ]; then > - DPDK_VER="20.11.4" > + DPDK_VER="20.11.6" > fi > install_dpdk $DPDK_VER > if [ "$CC" = "clang" ]; then > diff --git a/Documentation/faq/releases.rst b/Documentation/faq/releases.rst > index d62d575eb..977822984 100644 > --- a/Documentation/faq/releases.rst > +++ b/Documentation/faq/releases.rst > @@ -205,10 +205,10 @@ Q: What DPDK version does each Open vSwitch release work with? > 2.10.x 17.11.10 > 2.11.x 18.11.9 > 2.12.x 18.11.9 > - 2.13.x 19.11.10 > - 2.14.x 19.11.10 > - 2.15.x 20.11.4 > - 2.16.x 20.11.4 > + 2.13.x 19.11.13 > + 2.14.x 19.11.13 > + 2.15.x 20.11.6 > + 2.16.x 20.11.6 > ============ ======== > > Q: Are all the DPDK releases that OVS versions work with maintained? > diff --git a/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst b/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst > index 9ce5285c5..8bc6043f7 100644 > --- a/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst > +++ b/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst > @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Build requirements > In addition to the requirements described in :doc:`general`, building Open > vSwitch with DPDK will require the following: > > -- DPDK 20.11.4 > +- DPDK 20.11.6 > > - A `DPDK supported NIC`_ > > @@ -73,9 +73,9 @@ Install DPDK > #. Download the `DPDK sources`_, extract the file and set ``DPDK_DIR``:: > > $ cd /usr/src/ > - $ wget https://fast.dpdk.org/rel/dpdk-20.11.4.tar.xz > - $ tar xf dpdk-20.11.4.tar.xz > - $ export DPDK_DIR=/usr/src/dpdk-stable-20.11.4 > + $ wget https://fast.dpdk.org/rel/dpdk-20.11.6.tar.xz > + $ tar xf dpdk-20.11.6.tar.xz > + $ export DPDK_DIR=/usr/src/dpdk-stable-20.11.6 > $ cd $DPDK_DIR > > #. Configure and install DPDK using Meson > diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS > index c6b9c2ca8..76ecb2b80 100644 > --- a/NEWS > +++ b/NEWS > @@ -1,5 +1,20 @@ > v2.16.5 - xx xxx xxxx > --------------------- > + - DPDK: > + * OVS validated with DPDK 20.11.6. > + A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit > + 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > + This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA > + reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > + A fix has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > + It can be found here: > + https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/. > + If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use > + DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > + It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous > + bug fixes addressed since its release. > + If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use > + DPDK 20.11.6. > > v2.16.4 - 15 Jun 2022 > ---------------------
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: > > Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. > > > > A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > > This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > > A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > > If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > > It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. > > If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.6. > > > > [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> > > > > For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. > For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like > that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does not > like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. It is > working fine with 20.11.4. > > Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see failures > here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these failures > need to checked. > > [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 > [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 > [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 > [4] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date.html This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running external commands". And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408
On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: >>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. >>> >>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). >>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA reallocation of the virtqueues happen. >>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. >>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. >>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. >>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.6. >>> >>> [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/ >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> >>> >> >> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. >> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like >> that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does not >> like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. It is >> working fine with 20.11.4. >> >> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see failures >> here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these failures >> need to checked. >> >> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 >> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 >> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 >> [4] >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date.html > > This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. > Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next series of DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, not DPDK, we may just choose a better version of meson. Would be also nice to have one that works with python 3.10+, so we can actually use more recent versions of python without capping it at 3.9. Any suggestions for a version to use? Best regards, Ilya Maximets. P.S. I'll be out for a week, but it would be great if we can finally get some working solution for all branches and release a set of OVS stable versions after that. > > Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running > external commands". > And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. > https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 > https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408 > >
Hi David/Kevin I'm preparing a v3 which will update the recommended meson version. For DPDK 20.11.6 the currently recommended version by OVS is 0.47.1 which is not working, however, 0.48.1 does work, is it okay to recommend 0.48.1 in that case or should a later version be used? For 21.11.2 the recommended version by OVS is 0.49.2 which works fine, however, Sunil pointed out this patch http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220912170747.3128065-2-bruce.richardson@intel.com/ on the DPDK mailing list which suggests updating to meson version 0.53. Is it worth updating the recommended version in OVS to match this? If not I will send out a v3 for the patches targeted for branch-2.15 and branch-2.16 and I believe all other patches should be okay as they are. Thanks, Michael. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> > Sent: Tuesday 27 September 2022 00:03 > To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Kevin Traynor > <ktraynor@redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; > Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com> > Cc: i.maximets@ovn.org; Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; > dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; > maxime.coquelin@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. > > On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: > >>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. > >>> > >>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 > ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > >>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA > reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > >>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > >>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK > 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > >>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the > numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. > >>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use > DPDK 20.11.6. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083- > 2- > >>> david.marchand@redhat.com/ > >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> > >>> > >> > >> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. > >> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like > >> that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does > >> not like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. > >> It is working fine with 20.11.4. > >> > >> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see > >> failures here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these > >> failures need to checked. > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 > >> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 > >> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 > >> [4] > >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date. > >> html > > > > This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. > > Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. > > I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next series of > DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, not DPDK, we may > just choose a better version of meson. Would be also nice to have one that > works with python 3.10+, so we can actually use more recent versions of > python without capping it at 3.9. > > Any suggestions for a version to use? > > Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > > P.S. I'll be out for a week, but it would be great if we can finally > get some working solution for all branches and release a set of > OVS stable versions after that. > > > > > Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running > > external commands". > > And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. > > https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 > > https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408 > > > >
On 29/09/2022 11:38, Phelan, Michael wrote: > Hi David/Kevin Hi Michael, > I'm preparing a v3 which will update the recommended meson version. For DPDK 20.11.6 the currently recommended version by OVS is 0.47.1 which is not working, however, 0.48.1 does work, is it okay to recommend 0.48.1 in that case or should a later version be used? > If you are talking about a line in the NEWS, I wouldn't recommend a version but you could mention what the minimum working version is. For updating the CI, i'm not sure if there's a preferred version (above the min). Someone else might have a thought about a good choice. > For 21.11.2 the recommended version by OVS is 0.49.2 which works fine, however, Sunil pointed out this patch http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220912170747.3128065-2-bruce.richardson@intel.com/ on the DPDK mailing list which suggests updating to meson version 0.53. Is it worth updating the recommended version in OVS to match this? > There is no need to match what is a patch that might make DPDK 22.11 at the moment, but if it merges you could consider it for dpdk-latest branch as part of updates for 22.11 integration. > If not I will send out a v3 for the patches targeted for branch-2.15 and branch-2.16 and I believe all other patches should be okay as they are. > The CI is showing failures for 2.13/2.14/2.17 branches, can you take a look to see if any other updates to the patches are needed? http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?submitter=83523 Also, if you have to resend any of the patches, you could shorten the commit description lines so Ian won't have to :-) thanks, Kevin. > Thanks, > Michael. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> >> Sent: Tuesday 27 September 2022 00:03 >> To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Kevin Traynor >> <ktraynor@redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; >> Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com> >> Cc: i.maximets@ovn.org; Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; >> dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; >> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com >> Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. >> >> On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: >>>>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. >>>>> >>>>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 >> ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). >>>>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA >> reallocation of the virtqueues happen. >>>>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. >>>>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK >> 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. >>>>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the >> numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. >>>>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use >> DPDK 20.11.6. >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083- >> 2- >>>>> david.marchand@redhat.com/ >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. >>>> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like >>>> that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does >>>> not like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. >>>> It is working fine with 20.11.4. >>>> >>>> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see >>>> failures here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these >>>> failures need to checked. >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 >>>> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 >>>> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 >>>> [4] >>>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date. >>>> html >>> >>> This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. >>> Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. >> >> I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next series of >> DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, not DPDK, we may >> just choose a better version of meson. Would be also nice to have one that >> works with python 3.10+, so we can actually use more recent versions of >> python without capping it at 3.9. >> >> Any suggestions for a version to use? >> >> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. >> >> P.S. I'll be out for a week, but it would be great if we can finally >> get some working solution for all branches and release a set of >> OVS stable versions after that. >> >>> >>> Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running >>> external commands". >>> And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. >>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 >>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408 >>> >>> >
Hi Kevin, Thanks for getting back to me, I have left some responses inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> > Sent: Thursday 29 September 2022 12:05 > To: Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; Ilya Maximets > <i.maximets@ovn.org>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; > Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; Xueming(Steven) Li > <xuemingl@nvidia.com> > Cc: dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; > maxime.coquelin@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. > > On 29/09/2022 11:38, Phelan, Michael wrote: > > Hi David/Kevin > > Hi Michael, > > > I'm preparing a v3 which will update the recommended meson version. For > DPDK 20.11.6 the currently recommended version by OVS is 0.47.1 which is > not working, however, 0.48.1 does work, is it okay to recommend 0.48.1 in > that case or should a later version be used? > > > > If you are talking about a line in the NEWS, I wouldn't recommend a version > but you could mention what the minimum working version is. Noted, will do that. > > For updating the CI, i'm not sure if there's a preferred version (above the > min). Someone else might have a thought about a good choice. I haven't seen any other feedback on this so I will just go with the minimum version (0.48.1). > > > For 21.11.2 the recommended version by OVS is 0.49.2 which works fine, > however, Sunil pointed out this patch > http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220912170747.3128065-2- > bruce.richardson@intel.com/ on the DPDK mailing list which suggests > updating to meson version 0.53. Is it worth updating the recommended > version in OVS to match this? > > > > There is no need to match what is a patch that might make DPDK 22.11 at the > moment, but if it merges you could consider it for dpdk-latest branch as part > of updates for 22.11 integration. Makes sense, I will keep an eye on it. > > > If not I will send out a v3 for the patches targeted for branch-2.15 and > branch-2.16 and I believe all other patches should be okay as they are. > > > > The CI is showing failures for 2.13/2.14/2.17 branches, can you take a look to > see if any other updates to the patches are needed? > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?submitter=83523 I have investigated all the failures and don't think they are issues related to the patches. For branch-2.13 Intel CI failed on the conntrack - ICMP related with NAT test but passed on a retest and the GitHub build failed due to a problem with a HTTPS connection. For branch-2.14 Intel CI failed on the vlan_limit test which we have marked as unreliable previously. For branch-2.17 the wrong make check-dpdk command was used on the Intel CI and caused a failure. > > Also, if you have to resend any of the patches, you could shorten the commit > description lines so Ian won't have to :-) > Sure I will shorten those for any patches I resend. Thanks, Michael. > thanks, > Kevin. > > > Thanks, > > Michael. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> > >> Sent: Tuesday 27 September 2022 00:03 > >> To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Kevin Traynor > >> <ktraynor@redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; > >> Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com> > >> Cc: i.maximets@ovn.org; Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; > >> dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; > >> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com > >> Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. > >> > >> On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: > >>>>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. > >>>>> > >>>>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 > >> ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > >>>>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA > >> reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > >>>>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > >>>>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use > >>>>> DPDK > >> 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > >>>>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the > >> numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. > >>>>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to > >>>>> use > >> DPDK 20.11.6. > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>>> > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083- > >> 2- > >>>>> david.marchand@redhat.com/ > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. > >>>> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems > >>>> like that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) > >>>> does not like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github > effect. > >>>> It is working fine with 20.11.4. > >>>> > >>>> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see > >>>> failures here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all > >>>> these failures need to checked. > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 > >>>> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 > >>>> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 > >>>> [4] > >>>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022- > September/date. > >>>> html > >>> > >>> This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. > >>> Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. > >> > >> I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next > >> series of DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, > >> not DPDK, we may just choose a better version of meson. Would be > >> also nice to have one that works with python 3.10+, so we can > >> actually use more recent versions of python without capping it at 3.9. > >> > >> Any suggestions for a version to use? > >> > >> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > >> > >> P.S. I'll be out for a week, but it would be great if we can finally > >> get some working solution for all branches and release a set of > >> OVS stable versions after that. > >> > >>> > >>> Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running > >>> external commands". > >>> And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. > >>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 > >>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408 > >>> > >>> > >
On 29/09/2022 15:42, Phelan, Michael wrote: > Hi Kevin, > Thanks for getting back to me, I have left some responses inline. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> >> Sent: Thursday 29 September 2022 12:05 >> To: Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; Ilya Maximets >> <i.maximets@ovn.org>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; >> Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; Xueming(Steven) Li >> <xuemingl@nvidia.com> >> Cc: dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; >> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com >> Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. >> >> On 29/09/2022 11:38, Phelan, Michael wrote: >>> Hi David/Kevin >> >> Hi Michael, >> >>> I'm preparing a v3 which will update the recommended meson version. For >> DPDK 20.11.6 the currently recommended version by OVS is 0.47.1 which is >> not working, however, 0.48.1 does work, is it okay to recommend 0.48.1 in >> that case or should a later version be used? >>> >> >> If you are talking about a line in the NEWS, I wouldn't recommend a version >> but you could mention what the minimum working version is. > > Noted, will do that. >> >> For updating the CI, i'm not sure if there's a preferred version (above the >> min). Someone else might have a thought about a good choice. > > I haven't seen any other feedback on this so I will just go with the minimum version (0.48.1). >> >>> For 21.11.2 the recommended version by OVS is 0.49.2 which works fine, >> however, Sunil pointed out this patch >> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220912170747.3128065-2- >> bruce.richardson@intel.com/ on the DPDK mailing list which suggests >> updating to meson version 0.53. Is it worth updating the recommended >> version in OVS to match this? >>> >> >> There is no need to match what is a patch that might make DPDK 22.11 at the >> moment, but if it merges you could consider it for dpdk-latest branch as part >> of updates for 22.11 integration. > > Makes sense, I will keep an eye on it. >> >>> If not I will send out a v3 for the patches targeted for branch-2.15 and >> branch-2.16 and I believe all other patches should be okay as they are. >>> >> >> The CI is showing failures for 2.13/2.14/2.17 branches, can you take a look to >> see if any other updates to the patches are needed? >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?submitter=83523 > > I have investigated all the failures and don't think they are issues related to the patches. > > For branch-2.13 Intel CI failed on the conntrack - ICMP related with NAT test but passed on a retest and the GitHub build failed due to a problem with a HTTPS connection. > > For branch-2.14 Intel CI failed on the vlan_limit test which we have marked as unreliable previously. > > For branch-2.17 the wrong make check-dpdk command was used on the Intel CI and caused a failure. Sounds good - thanks for following up on these. I entered a DPDK Bugzilla to track the root cause of the meson issue in DPDK 20.11: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1088 David has setup a dpdk-stable mirror in github, so in future this type of meson issue should be found in DPDK LTS CI before it gets here. thanks, Kevin. >> >> Also, if you have to resend any of the patches, you could shorten the commit >> description lines so Ian won't have to :-) >> > Sure I will shorten those for any patches I resend. > > Thanks, > Michael. >> thanks, >> Kevin. >> >>> Thanks, >>> Michael. >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> >>>> Sent: Tuesday 27 September 2022 00:03 >>>> To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Kevin Traynor >>>> <ktraynor@redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; >>>> Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl@nvidia.com> >>>> Cc: i.maximets@ovn.org; Phelan, Michael <michael.phelan@intel.com>; >>>> dev@openvswitch.org; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>; >>>> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com >>>> Subject: Re: [branch-2.16, v2] dpdk: Use DPDK 20.11.6 release. >>>> >>>> On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: >>>>>>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 >>>> ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). >>>>>>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA >>>> reallocation of the virtqueues happen. >>>>>>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. >>>>>>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use >>>>>>> DPDK >>>> 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. >>>>>>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the >>>> numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. >>>>>>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to >>>>>>> use >>>> DPDK 20.11.6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> >> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083- >>>> 2- >>>>>>> david.marchand@redhat.com/ >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. >>>>>> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems >>>>>> like that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) >>>>>> does not like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github >> effect. >>>>>> It is working fine with 20.11.4. >>>>>> >>>>>> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see >>>>>> failures here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all >>>>>> these failures need to checked. >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 >>>>>> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 >>>>>> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 >>>>>> [4] >>>>>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022- >> September/date. >>>>>> html >>>>> >>>>> This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. >>>>> Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. >>>> >>>> I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next >>>> series of DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, >>>> not DPDK, we may just choose a better version of meson. Would be >>>> also nice to have one that works with python 3.10+, so we can >>>> actually use more recent versions of python without capping it at 3.9. >>>> >>>> Any suggestions for a version to use? >>>> >>>> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. >>>> >>>> P.S. I'll be out for a week, but it would be great if we can finally >>>> get some working solution for all branches and release a set of >>>> OVS stable versions after that. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Afaics, this is triggered by "build: fix warnings when running >>>>> external commands". >>>>> And reverting it is enough to fix the error with meson 0.47.1. >>>>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commits/20.11 >>>>> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/actions/runs/3113099408 >>>>> >>>>> >>> >
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 1:03 AM Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> wrote: > On 9/23/22 15:46, David Marchand wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:43 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 22/09/2022 13:40, Michael Phelan wrote: > >>> Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. > >>> > >>> A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). > >>> This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA reallocation of the virtqueues happen. > >>> A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. > >>> If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. > >>> It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. > >>> If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.6. > >>> > >>> [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/ > >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> > >>> > >> > >> For branches 2.15 [0] and 2.16 [1] I ran github actions and it failed. > >> For 2.16 branch I removed the patch and it passed [2]. It seems like > >> that the meson used (0.47.1 - which is min version for 20.11) does not > >> like the 20.11.5/6 package, or there is some other github effect. It is > >> working fine with 20.11.4. > >> > >> Afterwards, checking the ovs-build mailing [4] list I also see failures > >> here and an additional failure for 2.17 branch. So all these failures > >> need to checked. > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111862351 > >> [2] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3111865180 > >> [3] https://github.com/kevintraynor/ovs/actions/runs/3112089634 > >> [4] > >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-build/2022-September/date.html > > > > This looks like a regression in 20.11 LTS with older meson. > > Adding 20.11 LTS maintainers to the thread. > > I'm guessing that this regression will not be fixed until the next > series of DPDK stable releases. And since we're testing OVS here, > not DPDK, we may just choose a better version of meson. Would be > also nice to have one that works with python 3.10+, so we can actually > use more recent versions of python without capping it at 3.9. > > Any suggestions for a version to use? I agree that as consumers of DPDK, OVS could select a more recent version of meson that fits its needs. Just reinstating that we should stick to a fixed version. Regressions in meson are common. DPDK 22.11 just bumped the minimum version to 0.53 (.2 because of a regression in x86 cross builds). As for your ask here, I tried meson 0.53.2 + python 3.10 against my dpdk-latest branch, and it seems to work (waiting for all jobs to finish..). https://github.com/david-marchand/ovs/actions/runs/3234859080/jobs/5298498558
diff --git a/.ci/linux-build.sh b/.ci/linux-build.sh index c06e88c57..dd0a57850 100755 --- a/.ci/linux-build.sh +++ b/.ci/linux-build.sh @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ fi if [ "$DPDK" ] || [ "$DPDK_SHARED" ]; then if [ -z "$DPDK_VER" ]; then - DPDK_VER="20.11.4" + DPDK_VER="20.11.6" fi install_dpdk $DPDK_VER if [ "$CC" = "clang" ]; then diff --git a/Documentation/faq/releases.rst b/Documentation/faq/releases.rst index d62d575eb..977822984 100644 --- a/Documentation/faq/releases.rst +++ b/Documentation/faq/releases.rst @@ -205,10 +205,10 @@ Q: What DPDK version does each Open vSwitch release work with? 2.10.x 17.11.10 2.11.x 18.11.9 2.12.x 18.11.9 - 2.13.x 19.11.10 - 2.14.x 19.11.10 - 2.15.x 20.11.4 - 2.16.x 20.11.4 + 2.13.x 19.11.13 + 2.14.x 19.11.13 + 2.15.x 20.11.6 + 2.16.x 20.11.6 ============ ======== Q: Are all the DPDK releases that OVS versions work with maintained? diff --git a/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst b/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst index 9ce5285c5..8bc6043f7 100644 --- a/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst +++ b/Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Build requirements In addition to the requirements described in :doc:`general`, building Open vSwitch with DPDK will require the following: -- DPDK 20.11.4 +- DPDK 20.11.6 - A `DPDK supported NIC`_ @@ -73,9 +73,9 @@ Install DPDK #. Download the `DPDK sources`_, extract the file and set ``DPDK_DIR``:: $ cd /usr/src/ - $ wget https://fast.dpdk.org/rel/dpdk-20.11.4.tar.xz - $ tar xf dpdk-20.11.4.tar.xz - $ export DPDK_DIR=/usr/src/dpdk-stable-20.11.4 + $ wget https://fast.dpdk.org/rel/dpdk-20.11.6.tar.xz + $ tar xf dpdk-20.11.6.tar.xz + $ export DPDK_DIR=/usr/src/dpdk-stable-20.11.6 $ cd $DPDK_DIR #. Configure and install DPDK using Meson diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS index c6b9c2ca8..76ecb2b80 100644 --- a/NEWS +++ b/NEWS @@ -1,5 +1,20 @@ v2.16.5 - xx xxx xxxx --------------------- + - DPDK: + * OVS validated with DPDK 20.11.6. + A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit + 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). + This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA + reallocation of the virtqueues happen. + A fix has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. + It can be found here: + https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/. + If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use + DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. + It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous + bug fixes addressed since its release. + If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use + DPDK 20.11.6. v2.16.4 - 15 Jun 2022 ---------------------
Update OVS CLI and relevant documentation to use DPDK 20.11.6. A bug was introduced in DPDK 20.11.5 by the commit 33f2e3756186 ("vhost: fix unsafe vring addresses modifications"). This bug can cause a deadlock when vIOMMU is enabled and NUMA reallocation of the virtqueues happen. A fix [1] has been posted and pushed to the DPDK 20.11 branch. If a user wishes to avoid the issue then it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.4 until the release of DPDK 20.11.7. It should be noted that DPDK 20.11.4 does not benefit from the numerous bug fixes addressed since its release. If a user wishes to benefit from these fixes it is recommended to use DPDK 20.11.6. [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220725203206.427083-2-david.marchand@redhat.com/ Signed-off-by: Michael Phelan <michael.phelan@intel.com> --- v2: - Update recommended DPDK version for older OvS versions in Documentation. --- --- .ci/linux-build.sh | 2 +- Documentation/faq/releases.rst | 8 ++++---- Documentation/intro/install/dpdk.rst | 8 ++++---- NEWS | 15 +++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)