From: "Wang, Xiao W" <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
To: "Chen, Jing D" <jing.d.chen@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/fm10k: fix secondary process crash
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 00:20:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B7F2E978279D1D49A3034B7786DACF406EDC3140@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D3C620539@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Hi Mark,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chen, Jing D
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 9:30 AM
> To: Wang, Xiao W <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/fm10k: fix secondary process crash
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wang, Xiao W
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 11:59 AM
> > To: Chen, Jing D <jing.d.chen@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wang, Xiao W <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>;
> stable@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [PATCH] net/fm10k: fix secondary process crash
> >
> > If the primary process has initialized all the queues to vector pmd mode,
> the
> > secondary process should not use scalar code path, because the per queue
> data
> > structures haven't been prepared for that, e.g. txq->ops is for vector Tx
> rather
> > than scalar Tx.
> >
> > Fixes: a6ce64a97520 ("fm10k: introduce vector driver")
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiao Wang <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > index 388f929..680d617 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > @@ -2750,6 +2750,21 @@ static void __attribute__((cold))
> > int use_sse = 1;
> > uint16_t tx_ftag_en = 0;
> >
> > + if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
> > + /* primary process has set the ftag flag and txq_flags */
> > + txq = dev->data->tx_queues[0];
> > + if (fm10k_tx_vec_condition_check(txq)) {
> > + dev->tx_pkt_burst = fm10k_xmit_pkts;
> > + dev->tx_pkt_prepare = fm10k_prep_pkts;
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(DEBUG, "Use regular Tx func");
> > + } else {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(DEBUG, "Use vector Tx func");
> > + dev->tx_pkt_burst = fm10k_xmit_pkts_vec;
> > + dev->tx_pkt_prepare = NULL;
> > + }
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Why we need to check process type? What would happen if no changes
> made here?
If no change, then this function will re-set some fields of txq structure.
e.g. for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_tx_queues; i++) {
txq = dev->data->tx_queues[i];
fm10k_txq_vec_setup(txq);
}
Though these fields would be re-set to the same value, it doesn't look good. In secondary, we just read the queues and do not write them.
Best Regards,
Xiao
>
> > if (fm10k_check_ftag(dev->device->devargs))
> > tx_ftag_en = 1;
> >
> > @@ -2810,6 +2825,9 @@ static void __attribute__((cold))
> > else
> > PMD_INIT_LOG(DEBUG, "Use regular Rx func");
> >
> > + if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY)
> > + return;
> > +
> > for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++) {
> > struct fm10k_rx_queue *rxq = dev->data->rx_queues[i];
> >
> > @@ -2856,9 +2874,15 @@ static void __attribute__((cold))
> > dev->tx_pkt_burst = &fm10k_xmit_pkts;
> > dev->tx_pkt_prepare = &fm10k_prep_pkts;
> >
> > - /* only initialize in the primary process */
> > - if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY)
> > + /*
> > + * Primary process does the whole initialization, for secondary
> > + * processes, we just select the same Rx and Tx function as primary.
> > + */
> > + if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
> > + fm10k_set_rx_function(dev);
> > + fm10k_set_tx_function(dev);
> > return 0;
> > + }
> >
> > rte_eth_copy_pci_info(dev, pdev);
> > dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_DETACHABLE;
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-01 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-28 3:58 Xiao Wang
2017-03-31 1:30 ` Chen, Jing D
2017-04-01 0:20 ` Wang, Xiao W [this message]
2017-04-01 3:22 ` Chen, Jing D
2017-04-03 9:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-05-22 15:22 Xiao Wang
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=B7F2E978279D1D49A3034B7786DACF406EDC3140@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=xiao.w.wang@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jing.d.chen@intel.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/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).