Re: clarification on RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF flag

Re: clarification on RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF flag

[venkatesh bs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2029 bytes --]

Hi All,

In multithreaded/Multicore  environment can we use
RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
independently,
or this flag should always be used with
RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD.

We are trying to create and access the hash table with
RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
only.
We are getting crashes in multi core environments , we debugged nothing
wrong in the application , everything looks good.

We call rte_hash_del_key() first and from the returned position we are
calling rte_hash_free_key_with_position().

Please let me know if we missed something.

Thanks,
Venkatesh.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 7:07 PM venkatesh bs <venki.bsv@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> In multithreaded/Multicore  environment can we use RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
> independently,
> or this flag should always be used with
> RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD.
>
> We are trying to create and access the hash table with RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
> only.
> We are getting crashes in multi core environments , we debugged nothing
> wrong in the application , everything looks good.
>
> We call rte_hash_del_key() first and from the returned position we are
> calling rte_hash_free_key_with_position().
>
> Please let me know if we missed something.
>
> Thanks,
> Venkatesh.
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 9:15 AM venkatesh bs <venki.bsv@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> In multithreaded/Multicore  environment can we use RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
>> independently,
>> or this flag should always be used with
>> RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD.
>>
>> We are trying to create and access the hash table with RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF
>> only.
>> We are getting crashes in multi core environments , we debugged nothing
>> wrong in the application , everything looks good.
>>
>> We call rte_hash_del_key() first and from the returned position we are
>> calling rte_hash_free_key_with_position().
>>
>> Please let me know if we missed something.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Venkatesh.
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6698 bytes --]