From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A121A0573; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:33:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F63F2C02; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:33:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com (mail-io1-f67.google.com [209.85.166.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7699AFEB for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:33:38 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id h8so2412426iob.2 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 05:33:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hLvI9wNKjtROjgbcL/4NwsuLHmsO/KuTen+vwI4yitI=; b=L0mTbOmcwgDhF/0fVnzNMzcz1JWx5etWr8m3J/McAx0VSJzuGBQNwOHBRuQGD//wbm JpzpyyRoTBZmNRVsg0tuLuHL3MzBlnyUnJA24qY0F05cN4rasP4Rt6alF0Njyg/gYxBU mxmsSOM1RxDe5vij90iEiTwOHDhyLxY1RXkyHa4qnrwrKYxTNo3ccF6WbSVa3yWMTxyU 6q0rFC2j7+9UjAAU9qZvmo0h/rP7Fz6tde5hyggYJ2Jue7nsszzdPt6Jska2dI8YH+BA 4YmzJkNN+pBP20fLlTKqdgrtLDYi9ERp0ZaeHC7Nf4ChWyWTV8OlRZ3bxl9K5lNGL2pL UXTw== 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=hLvI9wNKjtROjgbcL/4NwsuLHmsO/KuTen+vwI4yitI=; b=LKm9D83lqHIArTHmPJxI6WuYgPr2uJdlxUkFdfIoLWcyZs6lqziBB6AzQZCTL/xWbF xw+3Wkl9V3QGbp6SmU5n8n16RfWqNzw4A+BWxgKEFEhnkvHkbmssXgceWg5WrdtoU3Ec TeHfEcDZHUSLR0Vk1yB9UF72CI4XRcGu+38mtX2KqNBaVO1u7/b6I3iT7QD2Emaw5TA4 KqU0I9+3vJ3pexM9YHfPgevRdoOPhAqzehXo7dLcXpVGbzkhu+o1cGQj1GJHgOfzl8HN L8NF5v+9+vIxU3xVmXMITsTqM1SseScLHDTeMLUKoEYP1nYLyYcetTIuYZpl5fUSp/Z0 KYLw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0Rs1sDuujz0DCR0yaFxzYH/73nsQsUybMQKlv0CbVz1+vJySEN n6aVf5yHsujUdWZoddGFEhNlkVVRH+rcvz/JO5w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsN0jYGFLbXCJXJhlAEen58dgV4SW3gHmEItLIIRoGrVgY0LKjoEa+80Xwlf4vU+7hI/cciJoLlfrVFwWzivWw= X-Received: by 2002:a02:77d7:: with SMTP id g206mr2766288jac.104.1583328817586; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 05:33:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1583114253-15345-1-git-send-email-xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 19:03:21 +0530 Message-ID: To: Tonghao Zhang Cc: dpdk-dev , Olivier Matz , Andrew Rybchenko , Gage Eads , "Artem V. Andreev" , Jerin Jacob , Nithin Dabilpuram , Vamsi Attunuru , Hemant Agrawal Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mempool: sort the rte_mempool_ops by name 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 6:48 PM Tonghao Zhang wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:45 PM Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:27 AM wrote: > > > > > > From: Tonghao Zhang > > > > > > The order of mempool initiation affects mempool index in the > > > rte_mempool_ops_table. For example, when building APPs with: > > > > > > $ gcc -lrte_mempool_bucket -lrte_mempool_ring ... > > > > > > The "bucket" mempool will be registered firstly, and its index > > > in table is 0 while the index of "ring" mempool is 1. DPDK > > > uses the mk/rte.app.mk to build APPs, and others, for example, > > > Open vSwitch, use the libdpdk.a or libdpdk.so to build it. > > > The mempool lib linked in dpdk and Open vSwitch is different. > > > > > > The mempool can be used between primary and secondary process, > > > such as dpdk-pdump and pdump-pmd/Open vSwitch(pdump enabled). > > > There will be a crash because dpdk-pdump creates the "ring_mp_mc" > > > ring which index in table is 0, but the index of "bucket" ring > > > is 0 in Open vSwitch. If Open vSwitch use the index 0 to get > > > mempool ops and malloc memory from mempool. The crash will occur: > > > > > > bucket_dequeue (access null and crash) > > > rte_mempool_get_ops (should get "ring_mp_mc", > > > but get "bucket" mempool) > > > rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk > > > ... > > > rte_pktmbuf_alloc > > > rte_pktmbuf_copy > > > pdump_copy > > > pdump_rx > > > rte_eth_rx_burst > > > > > > To avoid the crash, there are some solution: > > > * constructor priority: Different mempool uses different > > > priority in RTE_INIT, but it's not easy to maintain. > > > > > > * change mk/rte.app.mk: Change the order in mk/rte.app.mk to > > > be same as libdpdk.a/libdpdk.so, but when adding a new mempool > > > driver in future, we must make sure the order. > > > > > > * register mempool orderly: Sort the mempool when registering, > > > so the lib linked will not affect the index in mempool table. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang > > > --- > > > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > > index 22c5251..06dfe16 100644 > > > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c > > > @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > > rte_mempool_register_ops(const struct rte_mempool_ops *h) > > > { > > > struct rte_mempool_ops *ops; > > > - int16_t ops_index; > > > + unsigned ops_index, i; > > > > > > rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_mempool_ops_table.sl); > > > > > > @@ -50,7 +50,19 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > > return -EEXIST; > > > } > > > > > > - ops_index = rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops++; > > > + /* sort the rte_mempool_ops by name. the order of the mempool > > > + * lib initiation will not affect rte_mempool_ops index. */ > > > > +1 for the fix. > > For the implementation, why not use qsort_r() for sorting? > The implementation is easy, and the number of mempool driver is not too large. > But we can use the qsort_r to implement it. Since it is in a slow path, IMO, better to use standard sort functions for better readability. > > > > > + ops_index = rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops; > > > + for (i = 0; i < rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops; i++) { > > > + if (strcmp(h->name, rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[i].name) < 0) { > > > + do { > > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index] = > > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index -1]; > > > + } while (--ops_index > i); > > > + break; > > > + } > > > + } > > > + > > > ops = &rte_mempool_ops_table.ops[ops_index]; > > > strlcpy(ops->name, h->name, sizeof(ops->name)); > > > ops->alloc = h->alloc; > > > @@ -63,6 +75,8 @@ struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table = { > > > ops->get_info = h->get_info; > > > ops->dequeue_contig_blocks = h->dequeue_contig_blocks; > > > > > > + rte_mempool_ops_table.num_ops++; > > > + > > > rte_spinlock_unlock(&rte_mempool_ops_table.sl); > > > > > > return ops_index; > > > -- > > > 1.8.3.1 > > > > > > > -- > Thanks, > Tonghao