Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] rte_ethdev: fix unsafe memory access by calling RX callback.

[Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>]

On 3/4/20 5:05 PM, Tencent TGW team wrote:
> When compiling with -O0,
> the compiler does not optimize two memory accesses into one.
> Leads to accessing a null pointer when calling the RX callback.
> The way to access the TX callback is correct.

It looks like the patch is not passed through check-git-log.sh.
RX -> Rx, TX -> Tx

> 
> Signed-off-by: Tencent TGW team <tgw_team@tencent.com>

If I'm not mistaken, it must be a person here, not team.

> ---
>  lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> index d1a593ad1..35eb580ff 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> @@ -4388,10 +4388,8 @@ rte_eth_rx_burst(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t queue_id,
>  				     rx_pkts, nb_pkts);
>  
>  #ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_RXTX_CALLBACKS
> -	if (unlikely(dev->post_rx_burst_cbs[queue_id] != NULL)) {
> -		struct rte_eth_rxtx_callback *cb =
> -				dev->post_rx_burst_cbs[queue_id];
> -
> +	struct rte_eth_rxtx_callback *cb = dev->post_rx_burst_cbs[queue_id];
> +	if (unlikely(cb != NULL)) {
>  		do {
>  			nb_rx = cb->fn.rx(port_id, queue_id, rx_pkts, nb_rx,
>  						nb_pkts, cb->param);
> 

Sorry, but I don't understand. I don't see the difference in
potential NULL pointer deference above. What is the compiler? Version?

Or is it a race condition with queue post Rx burst callback
removal  while traffic is running?