On 5/27/2019 6:02 PM, Allain Legacy wrote:
> The rte_eth_dev_close() function now handles freeing resources for
> devices (e.g., mac_addrs).  To conform with the new close() behaviour we
> are asserting the RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE flag so that
> rte_eth_dev_close() releases all device level dynamic memory.
> 
> Second level memory allocated to each individual rx/tx queue is now
> freed as part of the close() operation therefore making it safe for the
> rte_eth_dev_close() function to free the device private data without
> orphaning the rx/tx queue pointers.
> 
> Cc: Matt Peters <matt.pet...@windriver.com>
> Signed-off-by: Allain Legacy <allain.leg...@windriver.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/avp/avp_ethdev.c | 44 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/avp/avp_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/avp/avp_ethdev.c
> index 09388d05f..0f7481c86 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/avp/avp_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/avp/avp_ethdev.c
> @@ -959,6 +959,8 @@ eth_avp_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
>       eth_dev->dev_ops = &avp_eth_dev_ops;
>       eth_dev->rx_pkt_burst = &avp_recv_pkts;
>       eth_dev->tx_pkt_burst = &avp_xmit_pkts;
> +     /* Let rte_eth_dev_close() release the port resources */
> +     eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE;
>  
>       if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
>               /*
> @@ -1940,8 +1942,25 @@ avp_dev_rx_queue_release(void *rx_queue)
>       unsigned int i;
>  
>       for (i = 0; i < avp->num_rx_queues; i++) {
> -             if (data->rx_queues[i] == rxq)
> +             if (data->rx_queues[i] == rxq) {
> +                     rte_free(data->rx_queues[i]);
>                       data->rx_queues[i] = NULL;
> +             }
> +     }
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +avp_dev_rx_queue_release_all(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
> +{
> +     struct avp_dev *avp = AVP_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(eth_dev->data->dev_private);
> +     struct rte_eth_dev_data *data = avp->dev_data;
> +     unsigned int i;
> +
> +     for (i = 0; i < avp->num_rx_queues; i++) {
> +             if (data->rx_queues[i]) {
> +                     rte_free(data->rx_queues[i]);
> +                     data->rx_queues[i] = NULL;
> +             }
>       }
>  }
>  
> @@ -1954,8 +1973,25 @@ avp_dev_tx_queue_release(void *tx_queue)
>       unsigned int i;
>  
>       for (i = 0; i < avp->num_tx_queues; i++) {
> -             if (data->tx_queues[i] == txq)
> +             if (data->tx_queues[i] == txq) {
> +                     rte_free(data->tx_queues[i]);
>                       data->tx_queues[i] = NULL;
> +             }
> +     }
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +avp_dev_tx_queue_release_all(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
> +{
> +     struct avp_dev *avp = AVP_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(eth_dev->data->dev_private);
> +     struct rte_eth_dev_data *data = avp->dev_data;
> +     unsigned int i;
> +
> +     for (i = 0; i < avp->num_tx_queues; i++) {
> +             if (data->tx_queues[i]) {
> +                     rte_free(data->tx_queues[i]);
> +                     data->tx_queues[i] = NULL;
> +             }
>       }
>  }
>  
> @@ -2104,6 +2140,10 @@ avp_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
>               /* continue */
>       }
>  
> +     /* release dynamic storage for rx/tx queues */
> +     avp_dev_rx_queue_release_all(eth_dev);
> +     avp_dev_tx_queue_release_all(eth_dev);
> +
>  unlock:
>       rte_spinlock_unlock(&avp->lock);
>  }
> 

Patch looks correct as it is and cover the resource freeing on
'rte_eth_dev_close()' path, but not complete in remove path.

The remove path stack trace is like following:
rte_avp_pmd->.remove [eth_avp_pci_remove]
  rte_eth_dev_pci_generic_remove()
    eth_avp_dev_uninit()
    rte_eth_dev_pci_release()
      rte_eth_dev_release_port()

rte_eth_dev_release_port() will free the ethdev allocated resources but not PMD
private ones (like the queues freed above),
it looks like just adding a 'avp_dev_close()' call into the
'eth_avp_dev_uninit()' can solve this, can you please check this option?
And if it make sense, can you please send a new version?

Reply via email to