From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] mbuf: fix dynamic flags lookup from secondary process
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:39:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201026103935.GL1898@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201024004331.25043-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
Hi Stephen,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:43:31PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> The dynamic flag management is broken if rte_mbuf_dynflag_lookup()
> is done in a secondary process because the local pointer to
> the memzone is not ever initialized.
>
> Fix it by using the same checks as dynfield_register().
> I.e if shared memory zone has not been looked up already,
> then discover it.
>
> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
> Cc: olivier.matz@6wind.com
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> ---
>
> v3 - change title, fix one extra whitespace
>
> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c | 20 ++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
> index 538a43f6959f..554ec5a1ca4f 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
> @@ -185,13 +185,11 @@ rte_mbuf_dynfield_lookup(const char *name, struct rte_mbuf_dynfield *params)
> {
> struct mbuf_dynfield_elt *mbuf_dynfield;
>
> - if (shm == NULL) {
> - rte_errno = ENOENT;
> - return -1;
> - }
> -
> rte_mcfg_tailq_read_lock();
> - mbuf_dynfield = __mbuf_dynfield_lookup(name);
> + if (shm == NULL && init_shared_mem() < 0)
> + mbuf_dynfield = NULL;
> + else
> + mbuf_dynfield = __mbuf_dynfield_lookup(name);
> rte_mcfg_tailq_read_unlock();
>
> if (mbuf_dynfield == NULL) {
> rte_errno = ENOENT;
> return -1;
There is still a small corner case here: on a primary process,
init_shared_mem() can return -1 in case rte_memzone_reserve_aligned()
returns a NULL memzone. In this situation, rte_errno is set by the
memzone layer by overriden to ENOENT.
Maybe something like this is better, what do you think?
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ __mbuf_dynfield_lookup(const char *name)
break;
}
- if (te == NULL) {
+ if (te == NULL || mbuf_dynfield == NULL) {
rte_errno = ENOENT;
return NULL;
}
@@ -185,19 +185,15 @@ rte_mbuf_dynfield_lookup(const char *name, struct rte_mbuf_dynfield *params)
{
struct mbuf_dynfield_elt *mbuf_dynfield;
- if (shm == NULL) {
- rte_errno = ENOENT;
- return -1;
- }
-
rte_mcfg_tailq_read_lock();
- mbuf_dynfield = __mbuf_dynfield_lookup(name);
+ if (shm == NULL && init_shared_mem() < 0)
+ mbuf_dynfield = NULL;
+ else
+ mbuf_dynfield = __mbuf_dynfield_lookup(name);
rte_mcfg_tailq_read_unlock();
- if (mbuf_dynfield == NULL) {
- rte_errno = ENOENT;
+ if (mbuf_dynfield == NULL)
return -1;
- }
if (params != NULL)
memcpy(params, &mbuf_dynfield->params, sizeof(*params));
Thanks,
Olivier
> @@ -384,13 +382,11 @@ rte_mbuf_dynflag_lookup(const char *name,
> {
> struct mbuf_dynflag_elt *mbuf_dynflag;
>
> - if (shm == NULL) {
> - rte_errno = ENOENT;
> - return -1;
> - }
> -
> rte_mcfg_tailq_read_lock();
> - mbuf_dynflag = __mbuf_dynflag_lookup(name);
> + if (shm == NULL && init_shared_mem() < 0)
> + mbuf_dynflag = NULL;
> + else
> + mbuf_dynflag = __mbuf_dynflag_lookup(name);
> rte_mcfg_tailq_read_unlock();
>
> if (mbuf_dynflag == NULL) {
> --
> 2.27.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-26 10:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-15 17:20 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: allow dynamic flags to be used by " Stephen Hemminger
2020-10-20 12:18 ` Olivier Matz
2020-10-20 20:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Stephen Hemminger
2020-10-24 0:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] mbuf: fix dynamic flags lookup from " Stephen Hemminger
2020-10-26 10:39 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2020-10-26 14:49 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-11-03 21:02 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-04 5:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] mbuf: allow dynamic flags to be used by " Stephen Hemminger
2020-11-04 8:17 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-04 16:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] " Stephen Hemminger
2020-11-04 16:26 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-04 17:41 ` David Marchand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201026103935.GL1898@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).