From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <haifeng.lin@huawei.com>
Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [58.251.152.64])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52085A53
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  9 Jun 2015 09:04:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from 172.24.2.119 (EHLO szxeml434-hub.china.huawei.com)
 ([172.24.2.119])
 by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued)
 with ESMTP id CPG38278; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 15:04:21 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.177.19.115) by szxeml434-hub.china.huawei.com
 (10.82.67.225) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 9 Jun 2015
 15:04:12 +0800
Message-ID: <55768FE2.5060505@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 15:04:02 +0800
From: Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Luke Gorrie <luke@snabb.co>
References: <1429720392-25345-1-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com>	<553995DB.4000801@huawei.com>
 <CAA2XHbef=TBAoAwNaAuVOAtHBqiQg2rD1-ExAYkHJ4pLsozJ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA2XHbef=TBAoAwNaAuVOAtHBqiQg2rD1-ExAYkHJ4pLsozJ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.177.19.115]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: flush used->idx update before reading
	avail->flags
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:04:32 -0000



On 2015/4/24 15:27, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> On 24 April 2015 at 03:01, Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
>> If not add memory fence what would happen? Packets loss or interrupt
>> loss?How to test it ?
>>
> 
> You should be able to test it like this:
> 
> 1. Boot two Linux kernel (e.g. 3.13) guests.
> 2. Connect them via vhost switch.
> 3. Run continuous traffic between them (e.g. iperf).
> 
> I would expect that within a reasonable timeframe (< 1 hour) one of the
> guests' network interfaces will hang indefinitely due to a missed interrupt.
> 
> You won't be able to reproduce this using DPDK guests because they are not
> using the same interrupt suppression method.
> 
> This is a serious real-world problem. I wouldn't deploy the vhost
> implementation without this fix.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Luke
> 

I think this patch can't resole this problem. On the other hand we still would miss interrupt.

After add rte_mb() function the we want the case is :
1.write used->idx. ring is full or empty.
2.virtio_net open interrupt.
3.read avail->flags.

but this case(miss interrupt) would happen too:
1.write used->idx. ring is full or empty.
2.read avail->flags.
3.virtio_net open interrupt.