From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: flush used->idx update before reading
	avail->flags
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 10:46:13 +0200
Message-ID: <20150609084613.GA18121@redhat.com>
References: <1429720392-25345-1-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com>
 <553995DB.4000801@huawei.com>
 <CAA2XHbef=TBAoAwNaAuVOAtHBqiQg2rD1-ExAYkHJ4pLsozJ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <55768FE2.5060505@huawei.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDF912A8
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  9 Jun 2015 10:46:16 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55768FE2.5060505@huawei.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>

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 03:04:02PM +0800, Linhaifeng wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2015/4/24 15:27, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> > On 24 April 2015 at 03:01, Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> If not add memory fence what would happen? Packets loss or interrupt
> >> loss?How to test it ?
> >>
> > 
> > You should be able to test it like this:
> > 
> > 1. Boot two Linux kernel (e.g. 3.13) guests.
> > 2. Connect them via vhost switch.
> > 3. Run continuous traffic between them (e.g. iperf).
> > 
> > I would expect that within a reasonable timeframe (< 1 hour) one of the
> > guests' network interfaces will hang indefinitely due to a missed interrupt.
> > 
> > You won't be able to reproduce this using DPDK guests because they are not
> > using the same interrupt suppression method.
> > 
> > This is a serious real-world problem. I wouldn't deploy the vhost
> > implementation without this fix.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > -Luke
> > 
> 
> I think this patch can't resole this problem. On the other hand we still would miss interrupt.
> 
> After add rte_mb() function the we want the case is :
> 1.write used->idx. ring is full or empty.
> 2.virtio_net open interrupt.
> 3.read avail->flags.
> 
> but this case(miss interrupt) would happen too:
> 1.write used->idx. ring is full or empty.
> 2.read avail->flags.
> 3.virtio_net open interrupt.
> 

That's why a correct guest, after detecting an empty used ring, must always
re-check used idx at least once after writing avail->flags.

By the way, similarly, host side must re-check avail idx after writing
used flags. I don't see where snabbswitch does it - is that a bug
in snabbswitch?

-- 
MST