From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio: fix packet corruption
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:59:51 +0200
Message-ID: <1c15f3d4-ed12-c315-cf88-8a71cc6fee5f@6wind.com>
References: <1468931519-7381-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <ED26CBA2FAD1BF48A8719AEF02201E361062162F@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <d9d58218-1b2a-1991-898d-ddda26f641f0@6wind.com>
 <ED26CBA2FAD1BF48A8719AEF02201E36106216C8@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "Tan, Jianfeng" <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>,
 "yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com" <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E756B2C01
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 16:00:00 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <ED26CBA2FAD1BF48A8719AEF02201E36106216C8@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.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>

Hi,

On 07/19/2016 03:57 PM, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:11 PM
>> To: Tan, Jianfeng; dev@dpdk.org; Xie, Huawei; yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio: fix packet corruption
>>
>> Hi Jianfeng,
>>
>> On 07/19/2016 03:03 PM, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
>>> Hi Oliver,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 8:32 PM
>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org; Tan, Jianfeng; Xie, Huawei;
>> yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com
>>>> Subject: [PATCH] virtio: fix packet corruption
>>>>
>>>> The support of virtio-user changed the way the mbuf dma address is
>>>> retrieved, using a physical address in case of virtio-pci and a virtual
>>>> address in case of virtio-user.
>>>>
>>>> This change introduced some possible memory corruption in packets,
>>>> replacing:
>>>>   m->buf_physaddr + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM
>>>> by:
>>>>   m->buf_physaddr + m->data_off     (through a macro)
>>>>
>>>> This patch fixes this issue, restoring the original behavior.
>>>
>>> Could you be more specific on why we cannot use m->data_off here?
>>
>> There is no guarantee that m->data_off == RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM here
>> as
>> virtqueue_enqueue_recv_refill() is called on a mbuf that is just
>> allocated with rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(). An alternative would be to set
>> data_off to RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM, but as it's a fix and we are close to
>> the release, I prefered to restore the initial behavior.
> 
> Oh yes, gotcha.
> 
> But if we do not set data_off properly, it's still buggy when others consume these mbufs, right?
> 

This is done later in virtio_recv_pkts*() functions, one the host has
written the data in the mbuf.