From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17375A034F;
Tue, 8 Jun 2021 22:48:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DBC340689;
Tue, 8 Jun 2021 22:48:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-pf1-f169.google.com (mail-pf1-f169.google.com
[209.85.210.169])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29B144067A
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 22:48:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-pf1-f169.google.com with SMTP id z26so16652647pfj.5
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 08 Jun 2021 13:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=ui5iHN/8lWhFT966mR3pM6/Ve2r19MaMCG3xXn7wSWo=;
b=ZBpY2mxcmmGFOjLvWncnObqoeU7G7PjFXiUwxfpDqthq2L1/Z07iR+Q+ZDpOLWpJqw
FGP3gAIT8shK3bI+Isf7QwKvExSIsW8v/6uAPFQFZU0wt61Ah2XQN4S3sA1zA7kvWti/
PvJ8dGApDMKgweyTgtRkHJEIJElDueH2MkTfVWJHTVVbQW7HlBONinTlYA3/ifbhlPOR
Cl+z4x8hTSee1IwJ+zVOy++Ht7/7Z69pzN4RFxPxCtpS1x7YdtXoK8MamvIhrg7AimK6
PE3/35VezihKmqRLc0HRTf011ME+rcON6yyHODua3Am2knUkJuMN+a6xsRt6qg3il2M4
WQog==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=ui5iHN/8lWhFT966mR3pM6/Ve2r19MaMCG3xXn7wSWo=;
b=fm/opN5vC/H5T4ll+RXz444jkOtcuZ9JU38MNd2ISHvxEa2zGiPWT3Yvo5//qr5tnB
PsVn6xh8FAdgD5HpeSMBQDP4+uvWgHry32cfau9Uz91OXm/xuQbSDZbYuJp66Qr4PZ5T
Dm9J446kxXxNVKCqwmC00u/yJ0sQSTlj0VCtJzTyuOH3RmeVl6pW0yf3KXPVw7B8AIri
XEXz1z/tSVp5yiuszQ4wLCPu/3JVBGlqYCzNtQcjT6JFZq6nW2/gN8FYKSsHus2pLRHr
/KhXyzVxvkk5Ngnr7niWFRmDMaNhSTaPRFqqsepmGzqdJZOGYIoDx4kXRYCgBKeEfimp
t2IQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533TuOr7gk7go7moyTzh2peoHBHvWWE08LFH8DXC6p/I2UO/Adi6
nRo16YrAc4wrOiI+m6n8NMDzjg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy2R1x6rVe4i787/mmNE3qMhB502EocVZEYkaVCBfZ0VaqfNNDJ0AlcM40mUM2x2lFIhpmgtg==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:3344:0:b029:28c:6f0f:cb90 with SMTP id
z65-20020a6233440000b029028c6f0fcb90mr1635663pfz.58.1623185308022;
Tue, 08 Jun 2021 13:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hermes.local (76-14-218-44.or.wavecable.com. [76.14.218.44])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a9sm11110745pfo.69.2021.06.08.13.48.27
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Tue, 08 Jun 2021 13:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 13:48:24 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, dev@dpdk.org, matan@mellanox.com,
Gaetan Rivet <grive@u256.net>
Message-ID: <20210608134824.3181b063@hermes.local>
In-Reply-To: <e59c4473-0322-8149-4dc5-0fc3952d5230@oktetlabs.ru>
References: <20210315192722.35490-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
<20210315192722.35490-3-stephen@networkplumber.org>
<6747934.v7ilQdk43l@thomas>
<e20cd33e-f44d-0cc9-67d7-43668c5fd866@oktetlabs.ru>
<20210608084210.73d05f60@hermes.local>
<e59c4473-0322-8149-4dc5-0fc3952d5230@oktetlabs.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/failsafe: fix primary/secondary mutex
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:55:17 +0300
Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> wrote:
> On 6/8/21 6:42 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:00:37 +0300
> > Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/19/21 8:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> About the title, better to speak about multi-process,
> >>> it is less confusing than primary/secondary.
> >>>
> >>> 15/03/2021 20:27, Stephen Hemminger:
> >>>> Set mutex used in failsafe driver to protect when used by
> >>>> both primary and secondary process. Without this fix, the failsafe
> >>>> lock is not really locking when there are multiple secondary processes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Bugzilla ID: 662
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >>>> Fixes: 655fcd68c7d2 ("net/failsafe: fix hotplug races")
> >>>> Cc: matan@mellanox.com
> >>>
> >>> The correct order for above lines is:
> >>>
> >>> Bugzilla ID: 662
> >>> Fixes: 655fcd68c7d2 ("net/failsafe: fix hotplug races")
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe.c
> >>>> @@ -140,6 +140,11 @@ fs_mutex_init(struct fs_priv *priv)
> >>>> ERROR("Cannot initiate mutex attributes - %s", strerror(ret));
> >>>> return ret;
> >>>> }
> >>>> + /* Allow mutex to protect primary/secondary */
> >>>> + ret = pthread_mutexattr_setpshared(&attr, PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED);
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + ERROR("Cannot set mutex shared - %s", strerror(ret));
> >>>
> >>> Why not returning an error here?
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> I think it would be safer to return an error here.
> >
> > Ok but it never happens.
> >
>
> May I ask why? 'man pthread_mutexattr_setpshared' says that it
> is possible.
>
The glibc implementation of pthread_mutexattr_setpshared is:
int
pthread_mutexattr_setpshared (pthread_mutexattr_t *attr, int pshared)
{
struct pthread_mutexattr *iattr;
int err = futex_supports_pshared (pshared);
if (err != 0)
return err;
iattr = (struct pthread_mutexattr *) attr;
if (pshared == PTHREAD_PROCESS_PRIVATE)
iattr->mutexkind &= ~PTHREAD_MUTEXATTR_FLAG_PSHARED;
else
iattr->mutexkind |= PTHREAD_MUTEXATTR_FLAG_PSHARED;
return 0;
}
And
/* FUTEX_SHARED is always supported by the Linux kernel. */
static __always_inline int
futex_supports_pshared (int pshared)
{
if (__glibc_likely (pshared == PTHREAD_PROCESS_PRIVATE))
return 0;
else if (pshared == PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED)
return 0;
else
return EINVAL;
}
There for the code as written can not return an error.
The check was only because someone could report a bogus
issue from a broken c library.