* [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs failure
@ 2020-04-11 11:23 wangyunjian
2020-04-15 15:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: wangyunjian @ 2020-04-11 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev
Cc: ferruh.yigit, keith.wiles, jerry.lilijun, xudingke, Yunjian Wang, stable
From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
Now the rxq->pool is mbuf concatenation, but its nb_segs is 1. When
conducting some sanity checks on the mbuf with debug enabled, it fails.
Fixes: 0781f5762cfe ("net/tap: support segmented mbufs")
CC: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
---
drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
index 0156d689d..6a77b2a7e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
@@ -339,6 +339,19 @@ tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(void)
DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM;
}
+static void
+tap_rxq_pool_free(struct rte_mbuf *pool)
+{
+ struct rte_mbuf *next;
+
+ while (pool) {
+ next = pool->next;
+ pool->next = NULL;
+ rte_pktmbuf_free(pool);
+ pool = next;
+ }
+}
+
/* Callback to handle the rx burst of packets to the correct interface and
* file descriptor(s) in a multi-queue setup.
*/
@@ -389,7 +402,7 @@ pmd_rx_burst(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t nb_pkts)
goto end;
seg->next = NULL;
- rte_pktmbuf_free(mbuf);
+ tap_rxq_pool_free(mbuf);
goto end;
}
@@ -1038,7 +1051,7 @@ tap_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
rxq = &internals->rxq[i];
close(process_private->rxq_fds[i]);
process_private->rxq_fds[i] = -1;
- rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
+ tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
rxq->pool = NULL;
rxq->iovecs = NULL;
@@ -1077,7 +1090,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_release(void *queue)
if (process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] > 0) {
close(process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id]);
process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] = -1;
- rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
+ tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
rxq->pool = NULL;
rxq->iovecs = NULL;
@@ -1485,7 +1498,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
return 0;
error:
- rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
+ tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
rxq->pool = NULL;
rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
rxq->iovecs = NULL;
--
2.19.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs failure
2020-04-11 11:23 [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs failure wangyunjian
@ 2020-04-15 15:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-16 2:18 ` wangyunjian
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2020-04-15 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: wangyunjian, dev; +Cc: keith.wiles, jerry.lilijun, xudingke, stable
On 4/11/2020 12:23 PM, wangyunjian wrote:
> From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
>
> Now the rxq->pool is mbuf concatenation, but its nb_segs is 1. When
> conducting some sanity checks on the mbuf with debug enabled, it fails.
>
> Fixes: 0781f5762cfe ("net/tap: support segmented mbufs")
> CC: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> index 0156d689d..6a77b2a7e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> @@ -339,6 +339,19 @@ tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(void)
> DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM;
> }
>
> +static void
> +tap_rxq_pool_free(struct rte_mbuf *pool)
> +{
> + struct rte_mbuf *next;
> +
> + while (pool) {
> + next = pool->next;
> + pool->next = NULL;
> + rte_pktmbuf_free(pool);
> + pool = next;
> + }
> +}
I am aware I have suggested this but I have missed that 'rte_mbuf_check()' still
may fail.
The 'rxq->pool' is a set of linked mbufs, each mbuf->next points to next one.
But all mbufs in the pool has 'nb_segs' as '1'. As far as I can see from code
this will cause a warning in 'rte_mbuf_check()'. If you can reproduce it you can
double check.
Your initial implementation seems the correct one, to fix the nb_segs for first
mbuf in the pool, sorry for the noise.
> +
> /* Callback to handle the rx burst of packets to the correct interface and
> * file descriptor(s) in a multi-queue setup.
> */
> @@ -389,7 +402,7 @@ pmd_rx_burst(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t nb_pkts)
> goto end;
>
> seg->next = NULL;
> - rte_pktmbuf_free(mbuf);
> + tap_rxq_pool_free(mbuf);
>
> goto end;
> }
> @@ -1038,7 +1051,7 @@ tap_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> rxq = &internals->rxq[i];
> close(process_private->rxq_fds[i]);
> process_private->rxq_fds[i] = -1;
> - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> rxq->pool = NULL;
> rxq->iovecs = NULL;
> @@ -1077,7 +1090,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_release(void *queue)
> if (process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] > 0) {
> close(process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id]);
> process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] = -1;
> - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> rxq->pool = NULL;
> rxq->iovecs = NULL;
> @@ -1485,7 +1498,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> return 0;
>
> error:
> - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> rxq->pool = NULL;
> rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> rxq->iovecs = NULL;
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs failure
2020-04-15 15:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
@ 2020-04-16 2:18 ` wangyunjian
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: wangyunjian @ 2020-04-16 2:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ferruh Yigit, dev; +Cc: keith.wiles, Lilijun (Jerry), xudingke, stable
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 11:13 PM
> To: wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: keith.wiles@intel.com; Lilijun (Jerry) <jerry.lilijun@huawei.com>; xudingke
> <xudingke@huawei.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs
> failure
>
> On 4/11/2020 12:23 PM, wangyunjian wrote:
> > From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> >
> > Now the rxq->pool is mbuf concatenation, but its nb_segs is 1. When
> > conducting some sanity checks on the mbuf with debug enabled, it fails.
> >
> > Fixes: 0781f5762cfe ("net/tap: support segmented mbufs")
> > CC: stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c index 0156d689d..6a77b2a7e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > @@ -339,6 +339,19 @@ tap_rx_offload_get_queue_capa(void)
> > DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM;
> > }
> >
> > +static void
> > +tap_rxq_pool_free(struct rte_mbuf *pool) {
> > + struct rte_mbuf *next;
> > +
> > + while (pool) {
> > + next = pool->next;
> > + pool->next = NULL;
> > + rte_pktmbuf_free(pool);
> > + pool = next;
> > + }
> > +}
>
> I am aware I have suggested this but I have missed that 'rte_mbuf_check()' still
> may fail.
>
> The 'rxq->pool' is a set of linked mbufs, each mbuf->next points to next one.
> But all mbufs in the pool has 'nb_segs' as '1'. As far as I can see from code this
> will cause a warning in 'rte_mbuf_check()'. If you can reproduce it you can
> double check.
>
> Your initial implementation seems the correct one, to fix the nb_segs for first
> mbuf in the pool, sorry for the noise.
OK, I can reproduce and test it. I will using initial implementation in next version.
Thanks,
Yunjian
>
> > +
> > /* Callback to handle the rx burst of packets to the correct interface and
> > * file descriptor(s) in a multi-queue setup.
> > */
> > @@ -389,7 +402,7 @@ pmd_rx_burst(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs,
> uint16_t nb_pkts)
> > goto end;
> >
> > seg->next = NULL;
> > - rte_pktmbuf_free(mbuf);
> > + tap_rxq_pool_free(mbuf);
> >
> > goto end;
> > }
> > @@ -1038,7 +1051,7 @@ tap_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> > rxq = &internals->rxq[i];
> > close(process_private->rxq_fds[i]);
> > process_private->rxq_fds[i] = -1;
> > - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> > + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> > rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> > rxq->pool = NULL;
> > rxq->iovecs = NULL;
> > @@ -1077,7 +1090,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_release(void *queue)
> > if (process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] > 0) {
> > close(process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id]);
> > process_private->rxq_fds[rxq->queue_id] = -1;
> > - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> > + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> > rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> > rxq->pool = NULL;
> > rxq->iovecs = NULL;
> > @@ -1485,7 +1498,7 @@ tap_rx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > return 0;
> >
> > error:
> > - rte_pktmbuf_free(rxq->pool);
> > + tap_rxq_pool_free(rxq->pool);
> > rxq->pool = NULL;
> > rte_free(rxq->iovecs);
> > rxq->iovecs = NULL;
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-04-16 2:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-11 11:23 [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tap: fix check for mbuf's nb_segs failure wangyunjian
2020-04-15 15:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-16 2:18 ` wangyunjian
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).