From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"dpdk stable" <stable@dpdk.org>,
"Olivier Matz" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:09:23 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1f1b16c6-09d3-f020-ee7b-10ac6536554e@oktetlabs.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201105074626.GL1898@platinum>
Just resend with lost Cc restored.
On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
>>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For instance in this
>>> case:
>>>
>>> m1 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
>>> rte_pktmbuf_append(m1, 500);
>>> m2 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
>>> rte_pktmbuf_append(m2, 500);
>>> rte_pktmbuf_chain(m1, m2);
>>> m0 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
>>> rte_pktmbuf_append(m0, 500);
>>> rte_pktmbuf_chain(m0, m1);
>>>
>>> As rte_pktmbuf_chain() does not reset nb_seg in the initial m1
>>> segment (this is not required), after this code the mbuf chain
>>> have 3 segments:
>>> - m0: next=m1, nb_seg=3
>>> - m1: next=m2, nb_seg=2
>>> - m2: next=NULL, nb_seg=1
>>>
>>> Freeing this mbuf chain will not restore nb_seg=1 in the second
>>> segment.
>>
>> Hmm, not sure why is that?
>> You are talking about freeing m1, right?
>> rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>> {
>> ...
>> if (m->next != NULL) {
>> m->next = NULL;
>> m->nb_segs = 1;
>> }
>>
>> m1->next != NULL, so it will enter the if() block,
>> and will reset both next and nb_segs.
>> What I am missing here?
>> Thinking in more generic way, that change:
>> - if (m->next != NULL) {
>> - m->next = NULL;
>> - m->nb_segs = 1;
>> - }
>> + m->next = NULL;
>> + m->nb_segs = 1;
>
> Ah, sorry. I oversimplified the example and now it does not
> show the issue...
>
> The full example also adds a split() to break the mbuf chain
> between m1 and m2. The kind of thing that would be done for
> software TCP segmentation.
>
If so, may be the right solution is to care about nb_segs
when next is set to NULL on split? Any place when next is set
to NULL. Just to keep the optimization in a more generic place.
> After this operation, we have 2 mbuf chain:
> - m0 with 2 segments, the last one has next=NULL but nb_seg=2
> - new_m with 1 segment
>
> Freeing m0 will not restore nb_seg=1 in the second segment.
>
>> Assumes that it is ok to have an mbuf with
>> nb_seg > 1 and next == NULL.
>> Which seems wrong to me.
>
> I don't think it is wrong: nb_seg is just ignored when not in the first
> segment, and there is nothing saying it should be set to 1. Typically,
> rte_pktmbuf_chain() does not change it, and I guess it's the same for
> many similar functions in applications.
>
> Olivier
>
>>
>>
>>> This is expected that mbufs stored in pool have their
>>> nb_seg field set to 1.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8f094a9ac5d7 ("mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool")
>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
>>> ---
>>> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c | 6 ++----
>>> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 12 ++++--------
>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
>>> index 8a456e5e64..e632071c23 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
>>> @@ -129,10 +129,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_free_pinned_extmem(void *addr, void *opaque)
>>>
>>> rte_mbuf_ext_refcnt_set(m->shinfo, 1);
>>> m->ol_flags = EXT_ATTACHED_MBUF;
>>> - if (m->next != NULL) {
>>> - m->next = NULL;
>>> - m->nb_segs = 1;
>>> - }
>>> + m->next = NULL;
>>> + m->nb_segs = 1;
>>> rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
>>> }
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> index a1414ed7cd..ef5800c8ef 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> @@ -1329,10 +1329,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>>> return NULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (m->next != NULL) {
>>> - m->next = NULL;
>>> - m->nb_segs = 1;
>>> - }
>>> + m->next = NULL;
>>> + m->nb_segs = 1;
>>>
>>> return m;
>>>
>>> @@ -1346,10 +1344,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>>> return NULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (m->next != NULL) {
>>> - m->next = NULL;
>>> - m->nb_segs = 1;
>>> - }
>>> + m->next = NULL;
>>> + m->nb_segs = 1;
>>> rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
>>>
>>> return m;
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-05 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-04 17:00 Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 0:15 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-05 7:46 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 8:26 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-11-05 9:10 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 11:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-05 12:31 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 13:14 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-05 13:24 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 13:55 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-05 16:30 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-05 23:55 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-06 7:52 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-06 8:20 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-06 8:50 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-06 10:04 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-06 10:07 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-06 11:53 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-06 12:23 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-08 14:16 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-11-08 14:19 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-10 16:26 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 8:33 ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-05 9:03 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 9:09 ` Andrew Rybchenko [this message]
2020-11-08 7:25 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-12-18 12:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz
2020-12-18 13:18 ` Morten Brørup
2020-12-18 23:33 ` Ajit Khaparde
2021-01-06 13:33 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Olivier Matz
2021-01-10 9:28 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-01-11 13:14 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-01-13 13:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Olivier Matz
2021-01-15 13:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " David Marchand
2021-01-15 18:39 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-01-18 17:52 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-01-19 8:32 ` Olivier Matz
2021-01-19 8:53 ` Morten Brørup
2021-01-19 12:00 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-01-19 12:27 ` Morten Brørup
2021-01-19 14:03 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-01-19 14:21 ` Morten Brørup
2021-01-21 9:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-01-19 14:04 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2021-07-24 8:47 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-07-30 12:36 ` Olivier Matz
2021-07-30 14:35 ` Morten Brørup
2021-07-30 14:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-07-30 15:14 ` Olivier Matz
2021-07-30 15:23 ` Morten Brørup
2021-08-04 13:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: add known issue with mbuf segment Thomas Monjalon
2021-08-04 14:25 ` Ajit Khaparde
2021-08-05 6:08 ` Morten Brørup
2021-08-06 14:21 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-08-06 14:24 ` Morten Brørup
2021-09-28 8:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free Thomas Monjalon
2021-09-28 9:00 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2021-09-28 9:25 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-09-28 9:39 ` Morten Brørup
2021-09-29 8:03 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-09-29 21:39 ` Olivier Matz
2021-09-30 13:29 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-10-21 8:26 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-01-21 9:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-01-21 9:29 ` Morten Brørup
2021-01-21 16:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdklab] " Lincoln Lavoie
2021-01-23 8:57 ` Morten Brørup
2021-01-25 17:00 ` Brandon Lo
2021-01-25 18:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-06-15 13:56 ` [dpdk-dev] " Morten Brørup
2021-09-29 21:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] " Olivier Matz
2021-09-30 13:27 ` Ali Alnubani
2021-10-21 9:18 ` David Marchand
2022-07-28 14:06 ` CI performance test results might be misleading Morten Brørup
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=1f1b16c6-09d3-f020-ee7b-10ac6536554e@oktetlabs.ru \
--to=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.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).