Thanks a lot Michal. Will follow approach that you have suggested.
Also I see that in case if TSO is enabled we set,
336 /* this param needed only for TSO */
337 ena_meta->l3_outer_hdr_len = 0;
338 ena_meta->l3_outer_hdr_offset = 0;
So even if TSO is enabled should these values be zero.
Thanks,
Param.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 7:24 PM Michał Krawczyk <m...@semihalf.com> wrote:
> Hi Param,
>
> Adding atomic operations to setting/clearing comp ctxt won't help, as
> there is no race there. The admin queue is designed this way, that
> only single completion context can be held, so you should serialize
> access to the rte_eth_stats_get().
> If you won't do that, the 2nd thread will try to hold already occupied
> context and this will result in disabling admin queue by the ena
> communication layer - you won't be able to send further admin
> commands.
> That's intended behavior and it is caused because you are trying to
> get the context with the occupied flag being set to true. Adding
> atomic operations there won't change anything, as there will still be
> a race between the thread that is waiting for the completion (occupied
> flag already send to true) and another thread, that is trying to send
> the same command using the same context (can't set occupied to true,
> as it's already true) - that should never happen.
>
> Without totally reworking ena_com admin queue design, we could add
> lock in ena_stats_get() - but that'll cause unnecessary locking in all
> of the applications that are using it from the main lcore context and
> as your design seems to be unique by doing it from multiple threads,
> maybe you could add a lock to your calls to the rte_eth_stats_get()?
>
> Another solution might be using xstats API, which should let you to
> get statistics from multiple threads as it's not using admin queue for
> that - all stats are being counter internally in the PMD.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
>
>
> pt., 29 lis 2019 o 13:01 kumaraparameshwaran rathinavel
> <kumaraparames...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >
> > Hi Michał,
> >
> > Thanks for getting back on this.
> >
> > In our design we are using multiple cores requesting for
> rte_eth_stats_get, it is not from one process and hence not serialized.
> Since in our design this is not serialized, and hence in get_comp_ctxt()
> checking for occupied flag and comp_ctxt_release() are not done atomically
> which is causing this issue. Please let me know if my understanding is
> correct, so that I will fix the application in such a way that it is done
> from one process and not multiple.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Param.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 6:44 PM Michał Krawczyk <m...@semihalf.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Param,
> >>
> >> first of all - you are using very old ena_com. This code comes from
> >> the DPDK version before v18.08. If you have any doubts, please check
> >> the newer version of the driver and DPDK as the potential bug could be
> >> already fixed there.
> >>
> >> Anyway, if you will look at the function get_comp_ctxt() which is
> >> called by __ena_com_submit_admin_cmd() to get the completion context,
> >> there is a check for the context if it's not occupied - in case it is
> >> (which will be true until comp_ctxt_release() will clear it), the new
> >> command using the same context cannot be used. So there shouldn't be
> >> two consumers using the same completion contexts.
> >>
> >> In addition, drivers that are using ena_com are sending admin commands
> >> one at a time during the init, so there shouldn't be even 2 commands
> >> at a time. The only exception is ena_com_get_dev_basic_stats(), which
> >> is called from rte_eth_stats_get() context - but if you consider DPDK
> >> application, it should use it on the management lcore after init, so
> >> it'll also be serialized.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Michal
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> pt., 8 lis 2019 o 07:02 kumaraparameshwaran rathinavel
> >> <kumaraparames...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >> >
> >> > Hi Michał,
> >> >
> >> > Please look at the below function,
> >> >
> >> > static int
> >> > ena_com_wait_and_process_admin_cq_polling(
> >> > struct ena_comp_ctx *comp_ctx,
> >> > struct ena_com_admin_queue *admin_queue)
> >> > {
> >> > unsigned long flags = 0;
> >> > u64 start_time;
> >> > int ret;
> >> >
> >> > start_time = ENA_GET_SYSTEM_USECS();
> >> >
> >> > while (comp_ctx->status == ENA_CMD_SUBMITTED) {
> >> > if ((ENA_GET_SYSTEM_USECS() - start_time) >
> >> > ADMIN_CMD_TIMEOUT_US) {
> >> > ena_trc_err("Wait for completion (polling) timeout\n");
> >> > /* ENA didn't have any completion */
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_LOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> > admin_queue->stats.no_completion++;
> >> > admin_queue->running_state = false;
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_UNLOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> >
> >> > ret = ENA_COM_TIMER_EXPIRED;
> >> > goto err;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_LOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> > ena_com_handle_admin_completion(admin_queue);
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_UNLOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > if (unlikely(comp_ctx->status == ENA_CMD_ABORTED)) {
> >> > ena_trc_err("Command was aborted\n");
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_LOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> > admin_queue->stats.aborted_cmd++;
> >> > ENA_SPINLOCK_UNLOCK(admin_queue->q_lock, flags);
> >> > ret = ENA_COM_NO_DEVICE;
> >> > goto err;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > ENA_ASSERT(comp_ctx->status == ENA_CMD_COMPLETED,
> >> > "Invalid comp status %d\n", comp_ctx->status);
> >> >
> >> > ret = ena_com_comp_status_to_errno(comp_ctx->comp_status);
> >> > err:
> >> > comp_ctxt_release(admin_queue, comp_ctx);
> >> > return ret;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > This is a case where there are two threads executing admin commands.
> >> >
> >> > The occupied flag is set to false in the function comp_ctxt_release.
> Let us say there are two consumers of completion context and C1 has a
> completion context and the same completion context can be used by another
> consumer C2 even before the C1 is resetting the occupied flag.
> >> >
> >> > This is because the ena_com_handle_admin_completion is done under
> spin lock and comp_ctxt_release is not under this spin lock.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Param
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:09 PM Michał Krawczyk <m...@semihalf.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> sob., 19 paź 2019 o 20:26 kumaraparameshwaran rathinavel
> >> >> <kumaraparames...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hi All,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In the ENA poll mode driver I see that every request in the admin
> queue is
> >> >> > associated with a completion context and this is preallocated
> during the
> >> >> > device initialisation. When the completion context is used we
> check for
> >> >> > occupied to be true in the 16.X version if the occupied flag is
> set to true
> >> >> > we assert and in the latest version I see that this is an error
> log. But
> >> >> > there is a time window where if the completion context would be
> available
> >> >> > to the other consumer but still the old consumer did not set the
> occupied
> >> >> > to false. The new consumer holds the admin queue lock to get the
> completion
> >> >> > context but the update by the old consumer to set the the occupied
> flag is
> >> >> > not done under lock. So should we make sure that the new consumer
> should
> >> >> > get the completion context only when the occupied flag is set to
> false. Any
> >> >> > thoughts on this?
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Param,
> >> >>
> >> >> Both the producer and the consumer are holding the spinlock while
> >> >> getting the completion context. If you see any situation where it
> >> >> isn't (besides the release function), please let me know.
> >> >> As it is protected by the lock, returning error while completion
> >> >> context is occupied (and it shouldn't) it fine, as it will stop the
> >> >> admin queue and allow the DPDK user application to execute the reset
> >> >> of the device.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Michal
> >> >>
> >> >> > If required I can try to make a patch where the completion context
> would be
> >> >> > available only after setting the occupied flag to false.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> > Param.
>
