From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0519A0A0C; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 16:25:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CADA41244; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 16:25:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qv1-f54.google.com (mail-qv1-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8966741243 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 16:25:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qv1-f54.google.com with SMTP id db14so1141207qvb.10 for ; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 07:25:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QjvZtX5Zbzi/f589THjDgk7bXUfdUZ9kkdBU3R2ZL2I=; b=Dcw1hmzBM3UOWRSNXirj+reaUqnbcZOmD038MokHw8yNG/QnqjMf1sEXMbnANq75IY iScgKC1X55Wh2pqodj4Mtxh9hGJM0twhDsA/TJ/5uccijg4bMl+ydq0opi9oRxRmFgoU YWZHYKLGfANDFvU251cr3cOYEIm6uO6Eu6cq4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QjvZtX5Zbzi/f589THjDgk7bXUfdUZ9kkdBU3R2ZL2I=; b=OqwdQ3vqUM/Tp4N4JIgs6L6sImPMrzGeVnMo6Z3CjSQCsxchVgVrGBW8PLIGboZx/1 VaP0I3A6ICW0rqbqxoX6NX4knI+FsB0u4XViUvqFtysGg3aeldqDRqK2U6RSIBRXOgjZ 2VCZXK1QBUS4AMjHVfT+UXRpNopzJpKNkqmumqO8xDM5suin8y7/UJcqIVP5wzwuVVxv WySGIkHaEPvIZWa6YC3T83oSre/AQgqbKO8Lc6+SRTea4t70jfuyh0XkX9fYswtHjFzh SKnH80bkRkg3rEO0uHY8D0ge9tAQhfKVM32cOAuimAef7hTQkShJfyd4R9yz7/WvI4QR idbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532oBoUJ5aNz8Os5mOv6YtPdRirg2xnwpZUIAtD3A/3AqGHI0wOv jiR/bhIXCQpAZHTLkwOI3+pEJ4LKQzp3r+J/04NQVg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxfe6EHrby5iIodbils/E0gX7agGIHV0CBv3uF4u2xbFTFK0Pq0sHXMdBH2QAPW+693HVFJGdxkp0tzYyTnzVI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:260a:: with SMTP id gu10mr6312859qvb.33.1628087117829; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 07:25:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210804132952.2674942-1-thomas@monjalon.net> In-Reply-To: <20210804132952.2674942-1-thomas@monjalon.net> From: Ajit Khaparde Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 07:25:01 -0700 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dpdk-dev , =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , Ali Alnubani , David Marchand , Alexander Kozyrev , Slava Ovsiienko , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Olivier Matz Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="000000000000569aee05c8bc92e7" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: add known issue with mbuf segment X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" --000000000000569aee05c8bc92e7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 6:30 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > A bug with segmented packets has been discovered but the agreement > to apply the fix is not concluded at the time of DPDK 21.08 release. > This bug seems to be in DPDK for many years and should be fixed in 21.11. > > Suggested-by: Olivier Matz > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde > --- > doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst > index d7559ec6bf..14e32585b8 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst > @@ -251,6 +251,18 @@ Known Issues > Also, make sure to start the actual text at the margin. > ======================================================= > > +* **Last mbuf segment not implicitly reset.** > + > + It is expected that free mbufs have their field ``nb_seg`` set to 1, > + so that when it is allocated, the user does not need to set its value. > + The mbuf free functions are responsible of resetting this field to 1 > + before returning the mbuf to the pool. > + > + When a multi-segment mbuf is freed, the field ``nb_seg`` is not reset > + to 1 for the last segment of the chain. On next allocation of this segment, > + if the field is not explicitly reset by the user, > + an invalid mbuf can be created, and can cause an undefined behavior. > + > > Tested Platforms > ---------------- > -- > 2.31.1 > --000000000000569aee05c8bc92e7--