From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/enic: decrement Tx mbuf reference count
 before recycling
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:04:17 +0200
Message-ID: <1ca338a4-a8fe-8149-2373-d02fee3199cb@6wind.com>
References: <1468016521-20280-1-git-send-email-johndale@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com
To: John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>, dev@dpdk.org
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 99B5A2BA1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:04:24 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <1468016521-20280-1-git-send-email-johndale@cisco.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 John,

On 07/09/2016 12:22 AM, John Daley wrote:
> In the Tx cleanup function, the reference count in mbufs to be
> returned to the pool should to be decremented before they are
> returned. Decrementing is not done by rte_mempool_put_bulk()
> so it must be done separately using __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> If decrementing does not result in a 0 reference count the mbuf
> is not returned to the pool and whatever has the last reference
> is responsible for freeing.
> 
> Fixes: 36935afbc53c ("net/enic: refactor Tx mbuf recycling")
> Reviewed-by: Nelson Escobar <neescoba@cisco.com>
> Signed-off-by: John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>
> ---
> Since reference counts are set to 0 when mbufs are reallocated from the
> pool, and sending packets with reference count not equal to 1 is probably
> an application error, this patch may not be critical. But a debug ASSERT
> caught it and it would be nice to have it fixed in 16.07.

Sending a packet with refcnt != 1 is not an error. It can happen when
using mbuf clones. So indeed it would be better to have in 16.07.

For the same reason, I also wonder if enic_free_wq_buf() should also be
updated with:

-       rte_mempool_put(mbuf->pool, mbuf);
+       rte_pktmbuf_free(mbuf);


Regards,
Olivier