From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx4: fix drop flow resources not freed
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:24:19 +0100
Message-ID: <20180130172419.GQ4256@6wind.com>
References: <1517327640-182072-1-git-send-email-motih@mellanox.com>
 <20180130164107.GP4256@6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
To: Moti Haimovsky <motih@mellanox.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f170.google.com (mail-wr0-f170.google.com
 [209.85.128.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F261B6A3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:24:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wr0-f170.google.com with SMTP id a43so4464140wrc.4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 09:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180130164107.GP4256@6wind.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://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, Jan 30, 2018 at 05:41:07PM +0100, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> Hi Moti,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 05:54:00PM +0200, Moti Haimovsky wrote:
> > This patch fixes the drop-flow resources not being freed when the device
> > is closed.
> > Issue can be observed when running testpmd and adding the following rule
> > more than once:
> > "flow create 0 ingress pattern eth / end actions drop / end"
> > then either exiting testpmd using the "quit" command or by running the
> > command: "port stop all"
> > 
> > Fixes: d3a7e09234e4 ("net/mlx4: allocate drop flow resources on demand")
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Moti Haimovsky <motih@mellanox.com>
> 
> Thanks for investigating this problem, however I do not think the proposed
> patch uses the right approach to address it, more below.
<snip>
> We need to find out why we do not end up with a number of mlx5_drop_put()
> calls matching that of mlx5_drop_get(). One is likely missing somewhere.
> I'll have a look as well.

After investigation, the following change in mlx4_flow_toggle() should
do the trick:

         if (flow->drop) {
 +               if (flow->ibv_flow)
 +                       return 0;
                 mlx4_drop_get(priv);

Without this, an already-enabled drop flow rule takes another reference when
re-enabled, hence the issue. I can send a fix tomorrow.

-- 
Adrien Mazarguil
6WIND