> -----Original Message-----
> From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 12:43
> To: Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China) <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>;
> vladimir.medved...@intel.com; bruce.richard...@intel.com
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <gavin...@arm.com>;
> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; nd
> <n...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/3] lib/lpm: use atomic store to avoid partial update
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Compiler could generate non-atomic stores for whole table entry
> updating.
> > > > This may cause incorrect nexthop to be returned, if the byte with
> > > > valid flag is updated prior to the byte with next hot is updated.
> > > ^^^^^^^
> > > Should be nexthop
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Changed to use atomic store to update whole table entry.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Medvedkin Vladimir <vladimir.medved...@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > v4: initial version
> > > >
> > > > lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> > > > index
> > > > baa6e7460..5d1dbd7e6 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> > > > @@ -767,7 +767,9 @@ add_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> > > > * Setting tbl8 entry in one go
> > > > to avoid
> > > > * race conditions
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[j] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[j],
> > > > + &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > >
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -837,7 +839,9 @@ add_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> > > > * Setting tbl8 entry in one go
> > > > to avoid
> > > > * race conditions
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[j] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[j],
> > > > + &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > >
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -965,7 +969,8 @@ add_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth,
> > > > * Setting tbl8 entry in one go to
> > > > avoid race
> > > > * condition
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[i] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[i],
> > > > &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > >
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1100,7 +1105,8 @@ add_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth,
> > > > * Setting tbl8 entry in one go to
> > > > avoid race
> > > > * condition
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[i] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[i],
> > > > &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > >
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1393,7 +1399,9 @@ delete_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20
> > > *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > >
> > > > RTE_LPM_TBL8_GROUP_NUM_ENTRIES); j++) {
> > > >
> > > > if (lpm->tbl8[j].depth <= depth)
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[j] =
> > > > new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm-
> > > >tbl8[j],
> > > > + &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > +
> > > > __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1490,7 +1498,9 @@ delete_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm
> > > > *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > >
> > > > RTE_LPM_TBL8_GROUP_NUM_ENTRIES); j++) {
> > > >
> > > > if (lpm->tbl8[j].depth <= depth)
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[j] =
> > > > new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm-
> > > >tbl8[j],
> > > > + &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > +
> > > > __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1646,7 +1656,8 @@ delete_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20
> > > > *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > > */
> > > > for (i = tbl8_index; i < (tbl8_index + tbl8_range);
> > > > i++) {
> > > > if (lpm->tbl8[i].depth <= depth)
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[i] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[i],
> > > > &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1677,7 +1688,8 @@ delete_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20
> > > > *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > > /* Set tbl24 before freeing tbl8 to avoid race
> > > > condition.
> > > > * Prevent the free of the tbl8 group from hoisting.
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl24[tbl24_index] = new_tbl24_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl24[tbl24_index],
> > > > &new_tbl24_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> > > > tbl8_free_v20(lpm->tbl8, tbl8_group_start);
> > > tbl8_alloc_v20/tbl8_free_v20 need to be updated to use
> > > __atomic_store
> > >
> > tbl8_alloc_v20/tbl8_free_v20 updates a single field of table entry.
> > The process is already atomic. Do we really need to use __atomic_store?
> I thought we agreed that all the tbl8 stores will use __atomic_store.
> IMO, it is better to use C11 atomic built-ins entirely, at least for the data
> structures used in reader-writer scenario. Otherwise, the code does not
> follow C11 memory model completely. (I do not know what to call such a
> model).
>
OK, change will be made in next version.
> >
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1730,7 +1742,8 @@ delete_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > > */
> > > > for (i = tbl8_index; i < (tbl8_index + tbl8_range);
> > > > i++) {
> > > > if (lpm->tbl8[i].depth <= depth)
> > > > - lpm->tbl8[i] = new_tbl8_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl8[i],
> > > > &new_tbl8_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1761,7 +1774,8 @@ delete_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm,
> > > > uint32_t ip_masked,
> > > > /* Set tbl24 before freeing tbl8 to avoid race
> > > > condition.
> > > > * Prevent the free of the tbl8 group from hoisting.
> > > > */
> > > > - lpm->tbl24[tbl24_index] = new_tbl24_entry;
> > > > + __atomic_store(&lpm->tbl24[tbl24_index],
> > > > &new_tbl24_entry,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> > > > tbl8_free_v1604(lpm->tbl8, tbl8_group_start);
> > > tbl8_alloc_v1604 /tbl8_free_v1604 need to be updated to use
> > > __atomic_store
> > Ditto.
> >
> > >
> > > > }
> > > > --
> > > > 2.17.1
