From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Olivier Matz" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:33:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C613EB@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201105074626.GL1898@platinum>
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 8:46 AM
>
> 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.
>
> 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
Acked-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
And while you are at it, please consider extending the description of the two mbuf fields with their invariants:
1. nb_segs is only valid for the first segment of a multi-segment packet.
2. next is NULL for non-segmented packets.
>
> >
> >
> > >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 8:34 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 [this message]
2020-11-05 9:03 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 9:09 ` Andrew Rybchenko
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=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C613EB@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.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).