From: "Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)" <matias.elo@nokia.com>
To: "harry.van.haaren@intel.com" <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [Bug 60] rte_event_port_unlink() causes subsequent events to end up in wrong port
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:20:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <09B2B474-8558-4EE6-BB26-460EF8C89909@nokia.com> (raw)
> I think this should handle the unlink case you mention, however perhaps you have identified a genuine bug. If you have more info or a sample config / app that easily demonstrates the issue that would help reproduce/debug here?
Hi Harry,
The bug report includes a simple test application for demonstrating the issue. I've done some further digging and the following simple patch seems to fix the issue of events ending up in wrong ports.
diff --git a/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c b/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c
index 8a2c9d4f9..57298345d 100644
--- a/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c
+++ b/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c
@@ -79,9 +79,11 @@ sw_schedule_atomic_to_cq(struct sw_evdev *sw, struct sw_qid * const qid,
int cq = fid->cq;
if (cq < 0) {
- uint32_t cq_idx = qid->cq_next_tx++;
- if (qid->cq_next_tx == qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs)
+ uint32_t cq_idx;
+ if (qid->cq_next_tx >= qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs)
qid->cq_next_tx = 0;
+ cq_idx = qid->cq_next_tx++;
+
cq = qid->cq_map[cq_idx];
/* find least used */
@@ -168,9 +170,11 @@ sw_schedule_parallel_to_cq(struct sw_evdev *sw, struct sw_qid * const qid,
do {
if (++cq_check_count > qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs)
goto exit;
- cq = qid->cq_map[cq_idx];
- if (++cq_idx == qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs)
+
+ if (cq_idx >= qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs)
cq_idx = 0;
+ cq = qid->cq_map[cq_idx++];
+
} while (rte_event_ring_free_count(
sw->ports[cq].cq_worker_ring) == 0 ||
sw->ports[cq].inflights == SW_PORT_HIST_LIST);
@@ -251,6 +255,9 @@ sw_schedule_qid_to_cq(struct sw_evdev *sw)
if (iq_num >= SW_IQS_MAX)
continue;
+ if (qid->cq_num_mapped_cqs == 0)
+ continue;
+
uint32_t pkts_done = 0;
uint32_t count = iq_ring_count(qid->iq[iq_num]);
However, events from atomic/ordered queues may still end up getting stuck when unlinking (scheduled back to unlinked port). In case of atomic queues the problem seems to be related to (struct sw_fid_t *)fid->cq fields being invalid. With ordered queues events get stuck in reorder buffer.
-Matias
next reply other threads:[~2018-06-19 9:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-19 9:20 Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo) [this message]
2018-06-26 13:35 ` Maxim Uvarov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-06-19 9:20 Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2018-06-04 7:21 bugzilla
2018-06-04 8:20 ` Jerin Jacob
2018-06-05 16:43 ` Van Haaren, Harry
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=09B2B474-8558-4EE6-BB26-460EF8C89909@nokia.com \
--to=matias.elo@nokia.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
--cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.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).