From: Alejandro Lucero [mailto:alejandro.luc...@netronome.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 8:56 PM To: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> Cc: Yao, Lei A <lei.a....@intel.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Xu, Qian Q <qian.q...@intel.com>; Lin, Xueqin <xueqin....@intel.com>; Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/6] use IOVAs check based on DMA mask
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:46 AM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net<mailto:tho...@monjalon.net>> wrote: 29/10/2018 12:39, Alejandro Lucero: > I got a patch that solves a bug when calling rte_eal_dma_mask using the > mask instead of the maskbits. However, this does not solves the deadlock. The deadlock is a bigger concern I think. I think once the call to rte_eal_check_dma_mask uses the maskbits instead of the mask, calling rte_memseg_walk_thread_unsafe avoids the deadlock. Yao, can you try with the attached patch? Hi, Lucero This patch can fix the issue at my side. Thanks a lot for you quick action. BRs Lei > Interestingly, the problem looks like a compiler one. Calling > rte_memseg_walk does not return when calling inside rt_eal_dma_mask, but if > you modify the call like this: > > - if (rte_memseg_walk(check_iova, &mask)) > + if (!rte_memseg_walk(check_iova, &mask)) > > it works, although the value returned to the invoker changes, of course. > But the point here is it should be the same behaviour when calling > rte_memseg_walk than before and it is not. Anyway, the coding style requires to save the return value in a variable, instead of nesting the call in an "if" condition. And the "if" check should be explicitly != 0 because it is not a real boolean. PS: please do not top post and avoid HTML emails, thanks
