From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF39201; Wed, 3 Oct 2018 09:50:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4F4F74F17; Wed, 3 Oct 2018 07:50:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.44] (ovpn-112-44.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.44]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FFE230912F5; Wed, 3 Oct 2018 07:50:44 +0000 (UTC) To: Ilya Maximets , dev@dpdk.org, tiwei.bie@intel.com, zhihong.wang@intel.com, jfreimann@redhat.com, nicknickolaev@gmail.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, alejandro.lucero@netronome.com Cc: dgilbert@redhat.com, stable@dpdk.org References: <20181002093651.24795-1-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> <20181002093651.24795-2-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> <20181002141315eucas1p16c87759329eeb374528bcb70a2d71ee4~Z0CLLGpN92076620766eucas1p1R@eucas1p1.samsung.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Message-ID: <2a57953d-67c6-26f3-f65f-4e5a1dcf1474@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 09:50:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181002141315eucas1p16c87759329eeb374528bcb70a2d71ee4~Z0CLLGpN92076620766eucas1p1R@eucas1p1.samsung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.26 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Wed, 03 Oct 2018 07:50:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 01/17] vhost: fix messages error checks X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 07:50:50 -0000 On 10/02/2018 04:15 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 02.10.2018 12:36, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >> Return of message handling has now changed to an enum that can >> take non-negative value that is not zero in case a reply is >> needed. But the code checking the variable afterwards has not >> been updated, leading to success messages handling being >> treated as errors. >> >> Fixes: 4e601952cae6 ("vhost: message handling implemented as a callback array") >> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin >> --- >> lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c >> index 7ef3fb4a4..060b41893 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c >> @@ -1783,7 +1783,7 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) >> } >> >> skip_to_post_handle: >> - if (!ret && dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle) { >> + if (ret != VH_RESULT_ERR && dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle) { >> uint32_t need_reply; >> >> ret = (*dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle)( >> @@ -1800,10 +1800,10 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) >> vhost_user_unlock_all_queue_pairs(dev); >> >> if (msg.flags & VHOST_USER_NEED_REPLY) { > > Maybe we need to reply here only if we didn't reply > already (not VH_RESULT_REPLY) ? Otherwise, we could > reply twice (with payload and with return code). Well, if the master sets this bit, it means it is waiting for a "reply-ack", so not sending it would cause the master to wait forever. It is the master responsibility to not set this bit for requests already expecting a non "reply-ack" reply (as you fixed it for postcopy's set mem table case). >> - msg.payload.u64 = !!ret; >> + msg.payload.u64 = ret == VH_RESULT_ERR; >> msg.size = sizeof(msg.payload.u64); >> send_vhost_reply(fd, &msg); >> - } else if (ret) { >> + } else if (ret == VH_RESULT_ERR) { >> RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, >> "vhost message handling failed.\n"); >> return -1; >>