From: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC V1] examples/l3fwd-power: fix memory leak for rte_pci_device
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 16:01:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <579c8578-01b6-3189-cc52-eec2c49a47bd@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4929922.EBv6eS3NRu@thomas>
Hi, Thomas
The new comments are as follows, and look forward to your reply. Thanks!
在 2021/9/8 15:20, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 08/09/2021 04:01, Huisong Li:
>> 在 2021/9/7 16:53, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>> 07/09/2021 05:41, Huisong Li:
>>>> Calling rte_eth_dev_close() will release resources of eth device and close
>>>> it. But rte_pci_device struct isn't released when app exit, which will lead
>>>> to memory leak.
>>> That's a PMD issue.
>>> When the last port of a PCI device is closed, the device should be freed.
>> Why is this a PMD problem? I don't understand.
> In the PMD close function, freeing of PCI device must be managed,
> so the app doesn't have to bother.
I know what you mean. Currently, there are two ways to close PMD device
(rte_eth_dev_close() and rte_dev_remove()).
For rte_dev_remove(), eth device can be closed and rte_pci_device also
can be freed, so it can make app not care about that.
But dev_close() is only used to close eth device, and nothing about
rte_pci_device is involved in the framework layer
call stack of dev_close(). The rte_pci_device is allocated and
initialized when the rte_pci_bus scans "/sys/bus/pci/devices" directory.
Generally, the PMD of eth devices operates on the basis of eth devices,
and rarely on rte_pci_device.
And the rte_pci_device corresponding to the eth devices managed and
processed by rte_pci_bus.
So, PMD is closed only based on the port ID of the eth device, whilch
only shuts down eth devices, not frees rte_pci_device
and remove it from rte_pci_bus.
>
>> As far as I know, most apps or examples in the DPDK project have only
>> one port for a pci device.
> The number of ports per PCI device is driver-specific.
>
>> When the port is closed, the rte_pci_device should be freed. But none of
>> the apps seem to do this.
> That's because from the app point of view, only ports should be managed.
> The hardware device is managed by the PMD.
> Only drivers (PMDs) have to do the relation between class ports
> and hardware devices.
Yes. But the current app only closes the port to disable the PMD, and
the rte_pci_device cannot be freed.
Because rte_pci_device cannot be released in dev_close() of PMD, and is
managed by framework layer.
Btw. Excluding rte_dev_probe() and rte_dev_remove(), it seems that the
DPDK framework only automatically
scans PCI devices, but does not automatically release PCI devices when
the process exits.
Above "automatic", I means that it doesn't involve apps or PMDs.
>
>>>> + /* Retrieve device address in eth device before closing it. */
>>>> + eth_dev = &rte_eth_devices[portid];
>>> You should not access this array, considered internal.
>> We have to save the address of rte_device to free rte_pci_device before
>> closing eth device.
>>
>> Because the the device address in rte_eth_dev struct will be set to a
>> NULL after closing eth device.
>>
>> It's also handled in OVS in this way.
> No you don't have to call rte_dev_remove at all from an app.
>
>>>> + rte_dev = eth_dev->device;
>>>> rte_eth_dev_close(portid);
>>>> + ret = rte_dev_remove(rte_dev);
>
>
> .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-16 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-07 3:41 Huisong Li
2021-09-07 8:53 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-08 2:01 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-08 7:20 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-16 8:01 ` Huisong Li [this message]
2021-09-16 10:36 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-17 2:13 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-17 12:50 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-18 3:24 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-18 8:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-26 12:20 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-26 19:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-27 1:44 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-30 6:28 ` Huisong Li
2021-09-30 7:50 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-08 6:26 ` lihuisong (C)
2021-10-08 6:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=579c8578-01b6-3189-cc52-eec2c49a47bd@huawei.com \
--to=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).