From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B60856A8 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:47:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Sep 2016 08:47:48 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,378,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="171987936" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.129]) ([10.237.221.129]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Sep 2016 08:47:47 -0700 To: Vladyslav Buslov , Stephen Hemminger References: <20160910135016.6468-2-vladyslav.buslov@harmonicinc.com> <20160920181637.26778-1-vladyslav.buslov@harmonicinc.com> <20160920113636.38b2ed2a@xeon-e3> <366f0b2a-abb6-9fdc-cd12-d79185d32c5e@intel.com> <20160921164444.6ea1030e@xeon-e3> Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 16:47:47 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: add support for core_id param in single threaded mode X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:47:49 -0000 On 9/22/2016 10:29 AM, Vladyslav Buslov wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:23:47 +0100 >> Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> >>> On 9/21/2016 6:15 PM, Vladyslav Buslov wrote: >>>>> On 9/20/2016 7:36 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:16:37 +0300 Vladyslav Buslov >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> @@ -123,6 +125,9 @@ static int __net_init kni_init_net(struct net >> *net) >>>>>>> /* Clear the bit of device in use */ >>>>>>> clear_bit(KNI_DEV_IN_USE_BIT_NUM, &knet- >>> device_in_use); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> + mutex_init(&knet->kni_kthread_lock); >>>>>>> + knet->kni_kthread = NULL; >>>>>>> + >>>>>> >>>>>> Why not just use kzalloc() here? You would still need to init the >>>>>> mutex etc, but it would be safer. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Vladyslav, >>>>> >>>>> This is good suggestion, if you send a new version for this update, >>>>> please keep my Ack. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> ferruh >>>> >>>> Hi Ferruh, Stephen, >>>> >>>> Could you please elaborate on using kzalloc for this code. >>>> Currently kni_thread_lock is value member of kni_net structure and >> never explicitly allocated or deallocated. >>>> Kni_kthread is pointer member of kni_net and is implicitly created and >> destroyed by kthread_run, kthread_stop functions. >>>> Which one of those do you suggest to allocate with kzalloc() and how >> would it improve safety? >>>> >>> >>> Currently: >>> >>> kni_init_net() { >>> knet = kmalloc(..); >>> .. >>> mutex_init(..); >>> knet->kni_thread = NULL; >>> } >>> >>> If you allocate knet via kzalloc(), no need to assign NULL to >>> kni_thread. Also this is safer because any uninitialized knet field >>> will be zero instead of random value. >>> >>> This is what I understood at least J >> >> Also any additional fields in knet will be set, avoiding any present or future >> uninitialized memory bugs. >> > > What about net_generic which is used instead of kmalloc in KNI code for newer kernels? > Quick skim through Linux code indicates that it doesn't zero out memory and people memset it manually. You are right, for that path memset required. > Just add memset(0) in HAVE_SIMPLIFIED_PERNET_OPERATIONS code? > Yes, I think that is good. Thanks, ferruh