> -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 9:04 PM > To: wangyunjian <wangyunj...@huawei.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: keith.wi...@intel.com; ophi...@mellanox.com; Lilijun (Jerry) > <jerry.lili...@huawei.com>; xudingke <xudin...@huawei.com>; > sta...@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/tap: free mempool when closing > > On 8/6/2020 1:45 PM, wangyunjian wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 12:36 AM > >> To: wangyunjian <wangyunj...@huawei.com>; dev@dpdk.org > >> Cc: keith.wi...@intel.com; ophi...@mellanox.com; Lilijun (Jerry) > >> <jerry.lili...@huawei.com>; xudingke <xudin...@huawei.com>; > >> sta...@dpdk.org > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/tap: free mempool when closing > >> > >> On 7/29/2020 12:35 PM, wangyunjian wrote: > >>> From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunj...@huawei.com> > >>> > >>> When setup tx queues, we will create a mempool for the 'gso_ctx'. > >>> The mempool is not freed when closing tap device. If free the tap > >>> device and create it with different name, it will create a new > >>> mempool. This maybe cause an OOM. > >>> > >>> Fixes: 050316a88313 ("net/tap: support TSO (TCP Segment Offload)") > >>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunj...@huawei.com> > >> > >> <...> > >> > >>> @@ -1317,26 +1320,31 @@ tap_gso_ctx_setup(struct rte_gso_ctx > >>> *gso_ctx, > >> struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > >>> { > >>> uint32_t gso_types; > >>> char pool_name[64]; > >>> - > >>> - /* > >>> - * Create private mbuf pool with TAP_GSO_MBUF_SEG_SIZE bytes > >>> - * size per mbuf use this pool for both direct and indirect mbufs > >>> - */ > >>> - > >>> - struct rte_mempool *mp; /* Mempool for GSO packets */ > >>> + struct pmd_internals *pmd = dev->data->dev_private; > >>> + int ret; > >>> > >>> /* initialize GSO context */ > >>> gso_types = DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_TSO; > >>> - snprintf(pool_name, sizeof(pool_name), "mp_%s", > dev->device->name); > >>> - mp = rte_mempool_lookup((const char *)pool_name); > >>> - if (!mp) { > >>> - mp = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(pool_name, > TAP_GSO_MBUFS_NUM, > >>> - TAP_GSO_MBUF_CACHE_SIZE, 0, > >>> + if (!pmd->gso_ctx_mp) { > >>> + /* > >>> + * Create private mbuf pool with TAP_GSO_MBUF_SEG_SIZE > >>> + * bytes size per mbuf use this pool for both direct and > >>> + * indirect mbufs > >>> + */ > >>> + ret = snprintf(pool_name, sizeof(pool_name), "mp_%s", > >>> + dev->device->name); > >>> + if (ret < 0 || ret >= (int)sizeof(pool_name)) { > >>> + TAP_LOG(ERR, > >>> + "%s: failed to create mbuf pool " > >>> + "name for device %s\n", > >>> + pmd->name, dev->device->name); > >> > >> Overall looks good. Only above error doesn't say why it failed, > >> informing the user that device name is too long may help her to overcome > the error. > > > > I found that the return value of functions snprintf was not checked > > when modifying the code, so fixed it. > > I think it maybe fail, because the max device name length is > > RTE_DEV_NAME_MAX_LEN(64). > > +1 to the check. > My comment was on the log message, which says "failed to create mbuf pool", > but it doesn't say it is failed because of long device name. > If user knows the reason of the failure, can prevent it by providing shorter > device name. > My suggestion is update the error log message to have the reason of failure.
Thanks for your suggestion, will include them in next version. > > > > > Do I need to split into two patches? > > I think OK to have the change in this patch. OK > > > > > Thanks, > > Yunjian > >
