From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F7FA0573; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:18:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 484C42C02; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:18:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com (mail-qt1-f194.google.com [209.85.160.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BEF62BB8 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:18:04 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id 59so1292833qtb.1 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 05:18:04 -0800 (PST) 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=CBKePpHZ77KjhrLk49fAfFEDMXqYKDIy5Q2WNMRwoGQ=; b=os92GQZKY3DdhfLNj2Q/C7ibqA51l+R3t8vy2+DXxoaRi3Z/me6N54amLvC9c0XZdg gKU9XlabXcJcVxGtjo52gDGhPZocnXOwqiGXcFQAp1HTyg4BpG1F3ZCSfOq7aVZ9utzC LuPDFdlYSYJEHvADg32rRuzWt5QPzDm++gS61jVrNtkIFCx43fFzJuiTJaAf/zu0cKxm XfsbSco8TUznC8fhXRYYXYtexX0wN6Ur3IEdRg3LJuM33egTXtZ6AaXkoOMYUvfGpk6B floFKRQUxl3/YGIZLF7M+HtF67NWxlWU14L32YQZ9LahBleenUIAq57cLcmYpOyjLb3r it+w== 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=CBKePpHZ77KjhrLk49fAfFEDMXqYKDIy5Q2WNMRwoGQ=; b=DvrdBiX1qjuIX0p9V4rvcDVAmztiPfEtPJUANTkTp0QTxGx8+iKSAn4AxvWgRSafJd eNbbGXY3vhG8VjRHX0VaItc32G7dQ0y71Le66xLguYk11ri9B4jqLc0dXrZJehsnEZHC gRI30ntJrnaTV8Jj9IdCkF+FUfF9vMV99LHx5IifLbYtn2dfyMNAsBxOczXE//ePNwSy Kv4nF0tnKWNywDbSoavtTnQnF3Tzvano+mUZ8TH6QZtfyV0CsbJs6/QcCixrAhzCxLcE mTmyJnKxFNF/0xGMGC0vup63acUhjJpnAh7ixnR2d7oNOIqFZV7OdONcPEI4JQOLYk8l dtKg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1WstoObf05wYGTTo8JFdF8WVu00DtVG9g9zwwz2Pw/BEAj85tD bb3X14E19iWyva0gND8K02w4qNOaBh+o6zCmqwM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vs/CCkqNI49cPGWZAVbpzrQx4ZNFM5qTAL5ljxa8dOmK9yCcKRmr8sUhaaYQ19szI02Gm4Ct6/ApKBuS6p86CI= X-Received: by 2002:aed:308a:: with SMTP id 10mr2375693qtf.221.1583327883358; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 05:18:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1583114253-15345-1-git-send-email-xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Tonghao Zhang Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 21:17:25 +0800 Message-ID: To: Jerin Jacob Cc: dpdk-dev , Olivier Matz , Andrew Rybchenko , Gage Eads , "Artem V. Andreev" , Jerin Jacob , Nithin Dabilpuram , Vamsi Attunuru , Hemant Agrawal Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:45 PM Jerin Jacob wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:27 AM wrote: > > > > From: Tonghao Zhang > > > > 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 > > --- > > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > index 22c5251..06dfe16 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > rte_mempool_register_ops(const struct rte_mempool_ops *h) > > { > > struct rte_mempool_ops *ops; > > - int16_t ops_index; > > + unsigned ops_index, i; > > > > rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_mempool_ops_table.sl); > > > > @@ -50,7 +50,19 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > return -EEXIST; > > } > > > > - ops_index = rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops++; > > + /* sort the rte_mempool_ops by name. the order of the mempool > > + * lib initiation will not affect rte_mempool_ops index. */ > > +1 for the fix. > For the implementation, why not use qsort_r() for sorting? The implementation is easy, and the number of mempool driver is not too large. But we can use the qsort_r to implement it. > > > + ops_index = rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops; > > + for (i = 0; i < rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops; i++) { > > + if (strcmp(h->name, rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[i].name) < 0) { > > + do { > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index] = > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index -1]; > > + } while (--ops_index > i); > > + break; > > + } > > + } > > + > > ops = &rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index]; > > strlcpy(ops->name, h->name, sizeof(ops->name)); > > ops->alloc = h->alloc; > > @@ -63,6 +75,8 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > ops->get_info = h->get_info; > > ops->dequeue_contig_blocks = h->dequeue_contig_blocks; > > > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops++; > > + > > rte_spinlock_unlock(&rte_mempool_ops_table.sl); > > > > return ops_index; > > -- > > 1.8.3.1 > > -- Thanks, Tonghao