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 4D114A052E;
Mon, 9 Mar 2020 04:02:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89FF72BE6;
Mon, 9 Mar 2020 04:02:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-qv1-f65.google.com (mail-qv1-f65.google.com
[209.85.219.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D59BEFEB
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 04:02:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-qv1-f65.google.com with SMTP id cz10so321270qvb.0
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 08 Mar 2020 20:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=cen4zTx+4MEdBJp8NuhuGFJk0ZR1o4QuBRkpv98tRGk=;
b=Od+3ZRYXjJdty7qvT+GfiJ4uolsaGPdUYDPfeK8gR2nM+kLidzPPRSu1yS956JY3VW
B0V4y7gQVLIz4YHpxypTG80iLxRqVpdtSUHhYX4avI7yrVTsBn5af+78pfYq1aFUuRB+
WhfQGogzE1v76IJeYKG+e0Hmf464KI6FsRQLTgZTSWjteSL2PRsKYKGsLJ+yImgYYgX2
MMblrd5zRPY/GyiobM3812VDSkwOT9r16ThkmJUrtu/9XsXuj3DoLkDgp8LqAb35zzMF
xrgoLhs0YNFh+7qLi0WeIze39ss8EEW8qpK8eToJiMa1eEEsKz42riJnqyc6EY69jrHA
mmtg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=cen4zTx+4MEdBJp8NuhuGFJk0ZR1o4QuBRkpv98tRGk=;
b=q51TX9RVSSSgt/jjBlf34GQMoQlZJctbXulgQEd0He3ldNUFRhmeGJHHZk+GiWZDQB
2h1mXbzfbLYOl0r1XKMNdlsw9KaX3q9wUdOV2WeCF411nL1cj0IV1TlX3ANLQQWMZ3Xr
lWScg8bj62FkKs+3Y9O2p8Wv4p6j84j3e2Fcf3cLbhpA9ssfCPJq6EhfiXZAoKjCob80
3lBgSlUKPZHJ9UqZoC5hBccfv+K3D41sj92cU0NSMZ+UOsOoVOfEr/HyTbTLxIxX2Cww
hhZBIYa26ZlhKNy0Acti9OH2ZjMgnwXDYh1km6YZ3tOut+vWC4gn/+g1IPPD9Lxg6PmO
n+dA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1mrxW1zPUBz/jvc2JtQY75Vz4br2v9Qs+y8G+lkMuq8XSvHp+H
mpOM+cCfTn9RzhVaOlA2sjP0ZB0/5Nd9cvgjT5w=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvh6muDzqJYxkMJ1SXNsm+aHB6eenothpEy42RpzmH2cYfqu4xjS63cWtvUh9Z9uFRafaKCyKjSXDFQzfrbEqc=
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:49c6:: with SMTP id j6mr1119221qvy.68.1583722922068;
Sun, 08 Mar 2020 20:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1583114253-15345-1-git-send-email-xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
<1583501776-9958-1-git-send-email-xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
<CALBAE1MUEgG_fZXyvHA70PZSp0uoez8tT7dXkasqe=G0qQSZ0g@mail.gmail.com>
<7420c590-4906-34e2-b0b8-d412df9005c8@solarflare.com>
<c15eead5-8ed9-7d6f-8f87-6963d640371b@solarflare.com>
In-Reply-To: <c15eead5-8ed9-7d6f-8f87-6963d640371b@solarflare.com>
From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 11:01:25 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMDZJNVu08PFvygj6Uo+Xt2rkGQ9i6SQ47-THfZsTKhP98LB0g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>, dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>,
"Artem V. Andreev" <artem.andreev@oktetlabs.ru>,
Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>,
Vamsi Attunuru <vattunuru@marvell.com>,
Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH dpdk-dev v3] mempool: sort the
rte_mempool_ops by name
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 Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 8:54 PM Andrew Rybchenko
<arybchenko@solarflare.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/20 3:51 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 3/6/20 4:37 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 7:06 PM <xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> The order of mempool initiation affects mempool index in the
> >>> rte_mempool_ops_table. For example, when building APPs with:
> >>>
> >>> $ gcc -lrte_mempool_bucket -lrte_mempool_ring ...
> >>>
> >>> The "bucket" mempool will be registered firstly, and its index
> >>> in table is 0 while the index of "ring" mempool is 1. DPDK
> >>> uses the mk/rte.app.mk to build APPs, and others, for example,
> >>> Open vSwitch, use the libdpdk.a or libdpdk.so to build it.
> >>> The mempool lib linked in dpdk and Open vSwitch is different.
> >>>
> >>> The mempool can be used between primary and secondary process,
> >>> such as dpdk-pdump and pdump-pmd/Open vSwitch(pdump enabled).
> >>> There will be a crash because dpdk-pdump creates the "ring_mp_mc"
> >>> ring which index in table is 0, but the index of "bucket" ring
> >>> is 0 in Open vSwitch. If Open vSwitch use the index 0 to get
> >>> mempool ops and malloc memory from mempool. The crash will occur:
> >>>
> >>> bucket_dequeue (access null and crash)
> >>> rte_mempool_get_ops (should get "ring_mp_mc",
> >>> but get "bucket" mempool)
> >>> rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk
> >>> ...
> >>> rte_pktmbuf_alloc
> >>> rte_pktmbuf_copy
> >>> pdump_copy
> >>> pdump_rx
> >>> rte_eth_rx_burst
> >>>
> >>> To avoid the crash, there are some solution:
> >>> * constructor priority: Different mempool uses different
> >>> priority in RTE_INIT, but it's not easy to maintain.
> >>>
> >>> * change mk/rte.app.mk: Change the order in mk/rte.app.mk to
> >>> be same as libdpdk.a/libdpdk.so, but when adding a new mempool
> >>> driver in future, we must make sure the order.
> >>>
> >>> * register mempool orderly: Sort the mempool when registering,
> >>> so the lib linked will not affect the index in mempool table.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> >> Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>
> >
> > The patch is OK, but the fact that ops index changes during
> > mempool driver lifetime is frightening. In fact it breaks
> > rte_mempool_register_ops() return value semantics (read
> > as API break). The return value is not used in DPDK, but it
> > is a public function. If I'm not mistaken it should be taken
> > into account.
Yes, should update the doc: how about this:
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index c90cf31..5a9c8a7 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -904,7 +904,9 @@ int rte_mempool_ops_get_info(const struct rte_mempool *mp,
* @param ops
* Pointer to an ops structure to register.
* @return
- * - >=0: Success; return the index of the ops struct in the table.
+ * - >=0: Success; return the index of the last ops struct in the table.
+ * The number of the ops struct registered is equal to index
+ * returned + 1.
* - -EINVAL - some missing callbacks while registering ops struct.
* - -ENOSPC - the maximum number of ops structs has been reached.
*/
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c
b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c
index b0da096..053f340 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c
@@ -26,7 +26,11 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = {
return strcmp(m_a->name, m_b->name);
}
-/* add a new ops struct in rte_mempool_ops_table, return its index. */
+/*
+ * add a new ops struct in rte_mempool_ops_table.
+ * on success, return the index of the last ops
+ * struct in the table.
+ */
int
rte_mempool_register_ops(const struct rte_mempool_ops *h)
{
> > Also I remember patches which warn about above behaviour
> > in documentation. If behaviour changes, corresponding
> > documentation must be updated.
>
> One more point. If the patch is finally accepted it definitely
> deserves few lines in release notes.
OK, a separate patch should be sent before DPDK 20.05 release ?
>
--
Thanks,
Tonghao