From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
"Horton, Remy" <remy.horton@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix wrong memset
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:09:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5a383807-dc74-5a17-d09c-1fa6c88d2333@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F10A841@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 1/23/2017 1:06 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yuanhan Liu [mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com]
>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:53 PM
>> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
>> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>; Horton, Remy
>> <remy.horton@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix wrong memset
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:44:11PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 07:40:50PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:32:23AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/23/2017 11:24 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:05:25AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index 4790faf..61f44e2 100644
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ struct rte_eth_dev *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - memset(&rte_eth_devices[port_id], 0, sizeof(*eth_dev->data));
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + memset(&rte_eth_dev_data[port_id], 0, sizeof(struct rte_eth_dev_data));
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not directly related to the this issue, but, after fix, this may have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues with secondary process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were patches sent to fix this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I mean this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/054422.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> d948f596fee2 ("ethdev: fix port data mismatched in multiple process
>>>>>>>>>>> model") should have fixed it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Think about case, where secondary process uses a virtual PMD, which does
>>>>>>>>>> a rte_eth_dev_allocate() call, shouldn't this corrupt primary process
>>>>>>>>>> device data?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, it may. However, I doubt that's the typical usage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But this is a use case, and broken now,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought it was broken since the beginning?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, memset(&rte_eth_dev_data[port_id], ...) breaks it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, you were talking about that particular case Remy's patch meant to
>>>>> fix.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and fix is known.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And there is already a fix?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/054422.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it should fix that issue.
>>>>
>>>> Well, few more thoughts: it may fix the crash issue Remy saw, but it
>>>> looks like more a workaround to me. Basically, if primary and secondary
>>>> shares a same port id, they should point to same device. Otherwise,
>>>> primary process may use eth_dev->data for a device A, while the
>>>> secondary process may use it for another device, as you said, it
>>>> could be a vdev.
>>>>
>>>> In such case, there is no way we could continue safely. That said,
>>>> the given patch avoids the total reset of eth_dev->data, while it
>>>> continues reset the eth_dev->data->name, which is wrong.
>>>>
>>>> So it's not a proper fix.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I think it's more about the usage. If primary starts with
>>>> a nic device A, while the secondary starts with a nic device B,
>>>> there is no way they could work well (unless they use different
>>>> port id).
>>>
>>> Why not?
>>> I think this is possible.
>>
>> Yes, it's possible: find another port id if that one is already taken
>> by primary process (or even by secondary process: think that primary
>> process might attatch a port later).
>>
>>> They just need to be initialized properly,
>>> so each rte_eth_devices[port_id]->data, etc. point to the right place.
>>
>> My understanding is, as far as they use different port_id, it might
>> be fine. Just not sure it's enough or not.
>
> As I understand, the main problem is that rte_eth_devices[] is local,
> while rte_eth_dev_data points to the shared memory array.
> And rte_eth_dev_allocate() assumes that if rte_eth_devices[x] is free,
> then rte_eth_dev_data[port_id] is also free.
> Which is wrong in case when primary/secondary processes have different devices attached.
> Another problem is that inside rte_ethdev.c we manipulate rte_eth_dev_data[]
> contents without grabbing any lock.
> I think it was an attempt to fix that issue in 16.07 timeframe or so,
> but I don't remember what happened with that patch.
Same here, I remember this already discussed and even some patches sent,
by Reshma if I remember correctly, but I don't remember latest status.
> Konstantin
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-23 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-20 8:04 Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-20 10:20 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-01-20 10:34 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-20 11:09 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-20 18:05 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-01-20 11:21 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-20 15:27 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-22 2:45 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 9:41 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-23 10:34 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 11:05 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-23 11:24 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 11:32 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-23 11:40 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 11:56 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 12:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-23 12:52 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-23 13:06 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-23 13:09 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2017-01-25 11:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-01-28 13:14 ` Yuanhan Liu
2017-01-30 11:07 ` Remy Horton
2017-01-24 8:29 ` Remy Horton
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=5a383807-dc74-5a17-d09c-1fa6c88d2333@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=remy.horton@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.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).