From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"vadim.suraev@gmail.com" <vadim.suraev@gmail.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] rte_mbuf: mbuf bulk alloc/free functions added + unittest
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:13:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <550A850D.9010309@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213F7188@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
Hi Konstantin,
On 03/18/2015 04:13 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>> From: Vadim Suraev [mailto:vadim.suraev@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 10:41 AM
>> To: Ananyev, Konstantin
>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rte_mbuf: mbuf bulk alloc/free functions added + unittest
>>
>> Hi, Konstantin,
>>
>> Got it. To make the same, nulling the next should be inside of the block as you said.
>> One question raises here: If a segment in the chain has refcnt > 1 (so its next is not assigned NULL), and the next segment has refcnt
>> == 1 (so it is freed), do you think this scenario is real/should be considered? If so, the former can be safely freed only by calling
>> rte_pktmbuf_free_seg which does not iterate. So why to keep next pointing to something?
>
> I think we need it, not just to keep things the same with rte_pktmbuf_free(), but because it is a right thing to do.
> Let say you have a packet in 2 mbufs chained together, both mbufs have refcnt==2.
> Then:
> rte_pktmbuf_free(firs_mbuf);
> rte_pktmbuf_free(firs_mbuf);
>
> Would work correctly and free both mbufs back to the mempool.
>
> While after:
> rte_pktmbuf_free_chain(first_mbuf);
> rte_pktmbuf_free_chain(first_mbuf);
>
> We would have first_mbuf freed back into the mempool, while second would get lost(memory leaking).
> Basically free() shouldn't modify any filed inside mbuf, except refcnt if rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) > 0
>
> About your case, when: first_mbuf->refcnt==2 and second_mbuf->refcnt==1.
> Right now, rte_pktmbuf_free() can't handle such cases properly,
> and, as I know, such situation is not considered as valid one.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. To me, the case you are
describing is similar to the case below, and it should work properly:
/* allocate a packet and clone it. After that, m1 has a
* refcnt of 2 */
m1 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc();
clone1 = rte_pktmbuf_clone(m1);
/* allocate another packet */
m2 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc();
/* chain m2 after m1, updating fields like total length.
* After that, m1 has 2 segments, the first one has a refcnt
* of 1 and the second has a refcnt of 2 */
mbuf_concat(m1, m2);
/* This will decrement the refcnt on the first segment and
* free the second segment */
rte_pktmbuf_free(m1);
/* free the indirect mbuf, and as the refcnt is 1 on the
* direct mbuf (m1), also release it */
rte_pktmbuf_free(clone1);
Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-19 8:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-17 21:36 vadim.suraev
2015-03-17 23:46 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-18 5:19 ` Vadim Suraev
[not found] ` <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213F7053@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
2015-03-18 9:56 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-18 10:41 ` Vadim Suraev
[not found] ` <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213F7136@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
2015-03-18 15:13 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-19 8:13 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2015-03-19 10:47 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-19 10:54 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-03-18 20:21 vadim.suraev
2015-03-18 20:58 ` Neil Horman
2015-03-19 8:41 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-03-19 10:06 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-19 13:16 ` Neil Horman
2015-03-23 16:44 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-03-23 17:31 ` Vadim Suraev
2015-03-23 23:48 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-24 7:53 ` Vadim Suraev
[not found] ` <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258214071C0@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
2015-03-24 11:00 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-23 18:45 ` Neil Horman
2015-03-30 19:04 ` Vadim Suraev
2015-03-30 20:15 ` Neil Horman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=550A850D.9010309@6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=vadim.suraev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).