From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] timer: fix rte_timer_manage and
	improve unit tests
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:06:38 +0200
Message-ID: <1803527.ArLAiIq7YK@xps13>
References: <1437691347-58708-1-git-send-email-rsanford2@gmail.com>
 <1438037168-639-1-git-send-email-rsanford2@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: rsanford2@gmail.com
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com
 [209.85.212.182]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1559E2E41
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2015 00:07:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so91496371wib.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 02 Aug 2015 15:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1438037168-639-1-git-send-email-rsanford2@gmail.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2015-07-27 18:46, rsanford2@gmail.com:
> From: Robert Sanford <rsanford@akamai.com>
> 
> This patchset fixes a bug in timer stress test 2, adds a new stress test
> to expose a race condition bug in API rte_timer_manage(), and then fixes
> the rte_timer_manage() bug.
> 
> Description of rte_timer_manage() race condition bug: Through code
> inspection, we notice a potential problem in rte_timer_manage() that
> leads to corruption of per-lcore pending-lists (implemented as
> skip-lists). The race condition occurs when rte_timer_manage() expires
> multiple timers on lcore A, while lcore B simultaneously invokes
> rte_timer_reset() for one of the expiring timers (other than the first
> one).
> 
> Lcore A splits its pending-list, creating a local list of expired timers
> linked through their sl_next[0] pointers, and sets the first expired
> timer to the RUNNING state, all during one list-lock round trip.
> Lcore A then unlocks the list-lock to run the first callback, and that
> is when A and B can have different interpretations of the subsequent
> expired timers' true state. Lcore B sees an expired timer still in the
> PENDING state, atomically changes the timer to the CONFIG state, locks
> lcore A's list-lock, and reinserts the timer into A's pending-list.
> The two lcores try to use the same next-pointers to maintain both lists!
> 
> v2 changes:
> Move patch descriptions to their respective patches.
> Correct checkpatch warnings.

Applied, thanks