From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/liquidio: do not touch mbuf initialized
	fields
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 13:59:40 +0200
Message-ID: <20170609135940.0c20c0e6@platinum>
References: <1496920971-9400-1-git-send-email-shijith.thotton@caviumnetworks.com>
 <8a2d812e-846b-73fd-4418-6da5738005d5@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Shijith Thotton <shijith.thotton@caviumnetworks.com>, dev@dpdk.org
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f169.google.com (mail-wr0-f169.google.com
 [209.85.128.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B0E2BB9
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  9 Jun 2017 13:59:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wr0-f169.google.com with SMTP id q97so30581446wrb.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 04:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8a2d812e-846b-73fd-4418-6da5738005d5@intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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 Ferruh,

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 12:24:56 +0100, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> On 6/8/2017 12:22 PM, Shijith Thotton wrote:
> > Avoid re-initializing of mbuf fields which are set while in pool.
> > Replaced lio_recv_buffer_alloc with rte_pktmbuf_alloc.
> > 
> > See commit 8f094a9ac5d7 ("mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool").
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Shijith Thotton <shijith.thotton@caviumnetworks.com>  
> 
> <...>
> 
> > @@ -489,9 +466,6 @@
> >  			droq->refill_count++;
> >  
> >  			if (likely(nicbuf != NULL)) {
> > -				nicbuf->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;  
> 
> Hi Shijith, Olivier,
> 
> nb_segs and next are initialized properly when mbuf allocated, but is
> "data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM" guaranteed?
> 
> > -				nicbuf->nb_segs = 1;
> > -				nicbuf->next = NULL;
> >  				/* We don't have a way to pass flags yet */
> >  				nicbuf->ol_flags = 0;
> >  				if (rh->r_dh.has_hash) {  
> 
> <...>

It's not guaranteed when using a raw allocation, i.e. rte_mbuf_raw_alloc()
or rte_mempool_get(). The PMD usually use these functions in Rx path to
fully initialize the mbuf fields on their own.

In this driver, it looks it uses rte_pktmbuf_alloc(), which calls
rte_pktmbuf_reset(), fully initializing the mbuf struct. So data_off is
properly set.


As a side note, I wonder if lio_recv_buffer_alloc() replaced by
rte_pktmbuf_alloc() everywhere in the code.


Olivier