From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08933A046B;
Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:29:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D084C1DE2F;
Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:29:12 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2144F1DE1D;
Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:29:10 +0100 (CET)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41])
by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
09 Jan 2020 06:29:10 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,414,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="396105734"
Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.107])
([10.237.220.107])
by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2020 06:29:09 -0800
To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, stable@dpdk.org
References: <20200109132720.15664-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
<8b59b3c9-ac1a-f448-e38d-063a6cb8ba7a@intel.com>
<20200109142351.GJ22738@platinum>
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Message-ID: <6e43ec20-4fa5-55fa-6ca9-2ffca9bcf7dc@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:29:08 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200109142351.GJ22738@platinum>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mempool: fix mempool virt populate with
small chunks
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
On 09-Jan-20 2:23 PM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 01:52:41PM +0000, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
>> On 09-Jan-20 1:27 PM, Olivier Matz wrote:
>>> To populate a mempool with a virtual area, the mempool code calls
>>> rte_mempool_populate_iova() for each iova-contiguous area. It happens
>>> (rarely) that this area is too small to store one object. In this case,
>>> rte_mempool_populate_iova() returns an error, which is forwarded by
>>> rte_mempool_populate_virt().
>>>
>>> This case should not throw an error in
>>> rte_mempool_populate_virt(). Instead, the area that is too small should
>>> just be ignored.
>>>
>>> To fix this issue, change the return value of
>>> rte_mempool_populate_iova() to -ENOBUFS when no object can be populated,
>>> so it can be ignored by the caller. As this would be an API change, add
>>> a compat wrapper to keep the current API unchanged. The wrapper will be
>>> removed for 20.11.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 354788b60cfd ("mempool: allow populating with unaligned virtual area")
>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>
>> The approach fixes the issue on my end, so
>>
>> Tested-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
>>
>>> Is there a simple way to ensure that we won't forget to remove the
>>> wrapper for 20.11? Anatoly suggested me to use versioned symbols, but
>>> it's not clear to me how.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, i'd like to do better than "ah shur we won't forget pinky swear".
>>
>> Can't we do this with ABI versioning? E.g.
>>
>> rte_populate_iova_v20() ... returns EINVAL
>>
>> rte_populate_iova_v21() ... returns ENOBUFS
>>
>> I'm pretty sure, even if it doesn't break, it will still be more likely to
>> not be forgotten because there's almost a guarantee that someone will grep
>> for symbol versioning macros across the codebase around 20.11 timeframe.
>
> Without using symbol versionning, would this be ok too?
>
> int
> rte_mempool_populate_iova(struct rte_mempool *mp, char *vaddr,
> rte_iova_t iova, size_t len, rte_mempool_memchunk_free_cb_t *free_cb,
> void *opaque)
> {
> int ret;
>
> ret = __rte_mempool_populate_iova(mp, vaddr, iova, len, free_cb, opaque);
>
> #if RTE_VERSION < RTE_VERSION_NUM(20, 11, 0, 0)
> if (ret == -ENOBUFS)
> ret = -EINVAL;
> #endif
>
> return ret;
> }
>
>
Well it would certainly work :) it just makes it more likely that this
will be missed.
How about, we leave your patch as is, and then you submit another patch
marked for [20.11] and mark it as Deferred straight away? This is
probably the best method to not forget that i can think of, if you're so
averse to symbol versioning :D
>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Anatoly
--
Thanks,
Anatoly