From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4C9108D for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:44:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Jan 2017 04:44:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,274,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="34223838" Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Jan 2017 04:44:13 -0800 Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.38]) by IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:44:12 +0000 From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: Yuanhan Liu , "Yigit, Ferruh" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , Thomas Monjalon , "Horton, Remy" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix wrong memset Thread-Index: AQHScvOtHWgM/Usc+U6FGskIrqD3PKFBOMAAgABE1YCAAk+ygIACBpeAgAAOuYCAAAizgIAABWeAgAACIoCAAAJcAIAABEkAgAALNhA= Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:44:11 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F10A80C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1484899493-11051-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <6e706e07-455f-de57-4f85-eb4e506528f1@intel.com> <4d897cf9-f1f4-d924-10cd-63e95b12b411@intel.com> <20170122024529.GZ10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <3451afa6-12fb-dc65-f379-873facc0301c@intel.com> <20170123103417.GB10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <53a23156-dcb9-b41f-c27c-5bd13d5874f6@intel.com> <20170123112445.GE10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <90752e37-444b-e2bf-6d4b-1bf2eda38deb@intel.com> <20170123114050.GF10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20170123115610.GG10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20170123115610.GG10293@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix wrong memset X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:44:16 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Yuanhan Liu > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:56 AM > To: Yigit, Ferruh > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Thomas Monjalon ; Horton, Re= my > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix wrong memset >=20 > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 07:40:50PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:32:23AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > On 1/23/2017 11:24 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:05:25AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +- > > > >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ethe= r/rte_ethdev.c > > > >>>>>>>> index 4790faf..61f44e2 100644 > > > >>>>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c > > > >>>>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c > > > >>>>>>>> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ struct rte_eth_dev * > > > >>>>>>>> return NULL; > > > >>>>>>>> } > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> - memset(&rte_eth_devices[port_id], 0, sizeof(*eth_dev->data= )); > > > >>>>>>>> + memset(&rte_eth_dev_data[port_id], 0, sizeof(struct rte_et= h_dev_data)); > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Not directly related to the this issue, but, after fix, this = may have > > > >>>>>>> issues with secondary process. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> There were patches sent to fix this. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I mean this one: > > > >>>>>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/054422.html > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> d948f596fee2 ("ethdev: fix port data mismatched in multiple pro= cess > > > >>>>> model") should have fixed it. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Think about case, where secondary process uses a virtual PMD, wh= ich does > > > >>>> a rte_eth_dev_allocate() call, shouldn't this corrupt primary pr= ocess > > > >>>> device data? > > > >>> > > > >>> Yes, it may. However, I doubt that's the typical usage. > > > >> > > > >> But this is a use case, and broken now, > > > > > > > > I thought it was broken since the beginning? > > > > > > No, memset(&rte_eth_dev_data[port_id], ...) breaks it. > > > > Oh, you were talking about that particular case Remy's patch meant to > > fix. > > > > > >> and fix is known. > > > > > > > > And there is already a fix? > > > > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/054422.html > > > > Yes, it should fix that issue. >=20 > Well, few more thoughts: it may fix the crash issue Remy saw, but it > looks like more a workaround to me. Basically, if primary and secondary > shares a same port id, they should point to same device. Otherwise, > primary process may use eth_dev->data for a device A, while the > secondary process may use it for another device, as you said, it > could be a vdev. >=20 > In such case, there is no way we could continue safely. That said, > the given patch avoids the total reset of eth_dev->data, while it > continues reset the eth_dev->data->name, which is wrong. >=20 > So it's not a proper fix. >=20 > Again, I think it's more about the usage. If primary starts with > a nic device A, while the secondary starts with a nic device B, > there is no way they could work well (unless they use different > port id). Why not? I think this is possible. They just need to be initialized properly, so each rte_eth_devices[port_id]->data, etc. point to the right place. Konstantin >=20 > --yliu >=20 > > One question: do Remy or you regularly > > run some multiple process test cases (and with vdev both in primary > > and secondary process)?