Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: decrease refcnt when detaching

[Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>]

Hi Hiroyuki,


On 05/15/2016 05:50 PM, Hiroyuki Mikita wrote:
> The rte_pktmbuf_detach() function should decrease refcnt on a direct
> buffer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hiroyuki Mikita <h.mikita89@gmail.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> index 529debb..3b117ca 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -1468,9 +1468,11 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
>   */
>  static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  {
> +	struct rte_mbuf *md = rte_mbuf_from_indirect(m);
>  	struct rte_mempool *mp = m->pool;
>  	uint32_t mbuf_size, buf_len, priv_size;
>  
> +	rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1);
>  	priv_size = rte_pktmbuf_priv_size(mp);
>  	mbuf_size = sizeof(struct rte_mbuf) + priv_size;
>  	buf_len = rte_pktmbuf_data_room_size(mp);
> @@ -1498,7 +1500,7 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m)) {
>  			struct rte_mbuf *md = rte_mbuf_from_indirect(m);
>  			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> -			if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
> +			if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(md) == 0)
>  				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
>  		}
>  		return m;
> 

Thanks for submitting this patch. I agree that rte_pktmbuf_attach()
and rte_pktmbuf_detach() are not symmetrical, but I think your patch
could trigger some race conditions.

Example:

- init: m, c1 and c2 are direct mbuf
- rte_pktmbuf_attach(c1, m);  # c1 becomes a clone of m
- rte_pktmbuf_attach(c2, m);  # c2 becomes another clone of m
- rte_pktmbuf_free(m);
- after that, we have:
  - m is a direct mbuf with refcnt = 2
  - c1 is an indirect mbuf pointing to data of m
  - c2 is an indirect mbuf pointing to data of m
- if we call rte_pktmbuf_free(c1) and rte_pktmbuf_free(c2) on 2
  different cores at the same time, m can be freed twice because
  (rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(md) == 0) can be true on both cores.

I think the proper way of doing would be to have rte_pktmbuf_detach()
returning the value of rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1), ensuring that
only one core will call _rte_mbuf_raw_free().

In the unit tests, in test_attach_from_different_pool(), the mbuf m
is never freed due to this behavior. That shows the current api is
a bit misleading. I think it should also be fixed in the patch.

Another issue is that it will break the API.
To avoid issues in applications relying on the current behavior of
rte_pktmbuf_detach(), I'd say we should keep the function as-is and
mark it as deprecated. Then, introduce a new function
rte_pktmbuf_detach2() (or any better name :) ) that changes the
behavior to what you suggest. An entry in the release note would
also be helpful.

The other option is to let things as-is and just document the behavior
of rte_pktmbuf_detach(), explicitly saying that it is not symmetrical
with the attach. But I'd prefer the first option.


Thoughts ?

Regards,
Olivier