From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CA45A0544 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:01:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239604021E; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:01:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f48.google.com (mail-ed1-f48.google.com [209.85.208.48]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D5D840146 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:01:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f48.google.com with SMTP id m15so15989735edb.13 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 07:01:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=SA+8KHKBV0WRQqRRXXhYcHSbN781BUNsDTUv3BG18jM=; b=oS43tYjBrYAwz6rLEnBwSS/y9JojrqXS/DcGTC5wn2+UEHq4yLbP6juOS2LBRUM5KH K0KYTwkIVdS4Ad5Mix8FilY2EkovB+giToqDoP60aqjucFfke9yHnr+72KO3olDY/OAC sT47Kz+CHIcn0uC2fIWitKmDUc+O9llLsFaDd5xW1gSLHgmjoUTQQ4ejXYlLNjTFfl29 GlqTePC4J9XnhXu4w5SFJAyNm7AwInueySVXlPkPQe6cddIuKE8PeIEO2fSj6YfjGHAh VJ85XzJmDIJjHzz4y3MjFcRpO5KfJG1Srx1cDp763jN984ya5H9Q85mU21lV9/wJNsbL VNSA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=SA+8KHKBV0WRQqRRXXhYcHSbN781BUNsDTUv3BG18jM=; b=AxqzcyVgdODGIB8+ZrRJwwm2r4CULuVrHpCXVRPv65eTYh/unACiJaIbN/fJUfBs+0 EIiqnfNsQzJIfmGKHTAcUnEDLJBuGubxMnqu/TogCdB20DbOnE7CUneqf2f7SdoJPOIM TC1NfaKra11UvH7KPLlo7bZONk1lZxnRfEtdD59wbrP3oXdMo8cPbqhwPAnADQNrKVLv ksa+rKMWgiPv6sXGYYJURkH1wR1UH9ILjKWsMFltH0CQ2xLijcyqhRlBoE8k2NAWhRVD rtWbog7eO+VCEuw8HEWiRlfy+Uede1RCdIiXuEne1qXMu/y0VBf4ZSpNweul6GFmcpWn XTGA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2hiDxll2sCe5g/HeN7rygdiWn4jkPKVT8KxM34YoIXo3VRNTQV VNHDKKUQbGWn8OOeQl7r1wgcWIZpwBSzu/52vbC24h6v8n8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4qhYo/fcK5JxZsIJOAA1JxMEerBiD5udGRSaCKOyLnUZTuuvPdVZObEb5z3gNTwwXu6y3512c3OHOUyP6oSBE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:11cc:b0:458:f610:8404 with SMTP id j12-20020a05640211cc00b00458f6108404mr17674682edw.75.1665410480927; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 07:01:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Gokilavani A Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:31:54 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Crash at rte_hash_del_key() To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001ef7cc05eaae984d" X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org --0000000000001ef7cc05eaae984d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, I am using *DPDK-18.02.02* in my application where we have created hash table with the following parameters, /**DPDK hash table configuration parameters */* *rte_hash_parameters flowHashParams = {* * .name = "Hash Table for FLOW",* * .entries = 128000,* * .key_len = sizeof(ipv4_flow_key_t), /* Key size - number of bytes */* * .hash_func = ipv4_flow_hash_crc, /* Function which creates the Key */* * .hash_func_init_val = 0,* * .extra_flag = RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD,* * /* FLAG - Multiple thread can use this HT */* *};* While adding and deleting an entry in hash table in DPDK-18.02.2, everything works well. While moving on with *DPDK-19.11.13*(latest stable version), we are facing a crash at *rte_hash_del_key()*. If we remove that extra_flag, *RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD *in the hash table parameters, we did not face any crash at rte_hash_del_key(). In my application, one thread adds entry to the hash table, another one thread reads those information and delete the entry in the hash table. How can we add that multiwriter support for the hash table? Is there any alternative to enable that support? Thanks, Gokilavani A --0000000000001ef7cc05eaae984d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

I am using DPDK-18.02.02 in my appl= ication=C2=A0where we have created hash table
with the following= =C2=A0parameters,

/*DPDK hash table config= uration parameters */
rte_hash_parameters flowHashParams = =3D {
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 .name =3D "Hash Table = for FLOW",
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 .entries =3D 128000,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 .key_len =3D sizeof(ipv4_flow_key_t),=C2=A0 /* Key = size - number of bytes */
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 .hash_func =3D ipv= 4_flow_hash_crc,=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/* Function which creates the Key */
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 .hash_func_init_val =3D 0,
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 .extra_flag =3D RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD,=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 /* FLAG - Multiple thread can use this HT *= /
};

While adding and d= eleting an entry in hash table in DPDK-18.02.2, everything works well.

While moving on with DPDK-19.11.13(latest stabl= e version), we are facing a crash at rte_hash_del_key(). If w= e remove that extra_flag,=C2=A0=C2=A0RTE_HAS= H_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD in the hash table parameters, we did not= face any crash at rte_hash_del_key().

In my appli= cation, one thread adds entry=C2=A0to the hash table, another one thread re= ads those information and delete the entry in the hash table.=C2=A0

How can we add that multiwriter support for the hash tabl= e? Is there any alternative to enable that support?

Thanks,
Gokilavani A


<= /div>
--0000000000001ef7cc05eaae984d--