> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2023 9:34 AM
> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; david.march...@redhat.com; olivier.m...@6wind.com;
> dharmik.thak...@arm.com; n...@arm.com;
> andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru; Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ring: fix unaligned memory access on aarch32
>
> +CC Gavin, reviewed the test case
>
> > From: Ruifeng Wang [mailto:ruifeng.w...@arm.com]
> > Sent: Friday, 10 November 2023 09.40
> >
> > On 2023/11/4 8:04 AM, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > I have for a long time now wondered why the ring functions for
> > enqueue/dequeue of 64-bit objects supports unaligned addresses, and now
> > I finally found the patch introducing it.
> > >
> > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Phil Yang
> > >> Sent: Monday, 9 March 2020 18.20
> > >>
> > >> The 32-bit arm machine doesn't support unaligned memory access. It
> > >> will cause a bus error on aarch32 with the custom element size ring.
> > >>
> > >> Thread 1 "test" received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
> > >> __rte_ring_enqueue_elems_64 (n=1, obj_table=0xf5edfe41, prod_head=0,
> > \
> > >> r=0xf5edfb80) at /build/dpdk/build/include/rte_ring_elem.h:177
> > >> 177 ring[idx++] = obj[i++];
> > >
> > > Which test is this? Why is it using an unaligned array of 64-bit
> > objects? (Notice that obj_table=0xf5edfe41.)
> >
> > The test case is:
> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/dpdk/latest/source/app/test/test_ring.c#L112
> > 1
> > This case deliberately use unaligned objects.
>
> Thank you, Ruifeng.
>
> Honnappa, I see you signed off on the patch introducing the test for
> unaligned objects:
> http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/app/test/test_ring.c?id=a9fe152363e283d4c590ab8e8d51396f2ffab9ff
>
> What was the rationale behind testing support for unaligned object pointers?
> Did any applications/customers use unaligned object
> pointers, or is it a purely academic test case?
>
> >
> > >
> > > Nobody in their right mind would use an unaligned array of 64-bit
> > objects. You can only create such an array if you force the compiler to
> > prevent automatic alignment! And all the functions in your application
> > using this array would also need to support unaligned addressing of
> > these objects.
It could be just one elem, not an array.
And the user can use 'packed' struct or so...
Agree, not a common case, but probably still possible.
> > >
> > > This seems extremely exotic, and not something any real application
> > would do!
> > >
> > > I would like to revert this patch for performance reasons.
Morten, could you probably explain first the problems you encountered with this
patch?
You mention about 'performance reasons', so did you notice any real slowdown?
>
> I could add an RTE_ASSERT() to verify that the pointer is aligned, for
> debugging purposes.
>
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Fixes: cc4b218790f6 ("ring: support configurable element size")
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Phil Yang <phil.y...@arm.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h | 4 ++--
> > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h
> > >> b/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h
> > >> index 3976757..663addc 100644
> > >> --- a/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h
> > >> +++ b/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h
> > >> @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ __rte_ring_enqueue_elems_64(struct rte_ring *r,
> > >> uint32_t prod_head,
> > >> const uint32_t size = r->size;
> > >> uint32_t idx = prod_head & r->mask;
> > >> uint64_t *ring = (uint64_t *)&r[1];
> > >> - const uint64_t *obj = (const uint64_t *)obj_table;
> > >> + const unaligned_uint64_t *obj = (const unaligned_uint64_t
> > >> *)obj_table;
> > >> if (likely(idx + n < size)) {
> > >> for (i = 0; i < (n & ~0x3); i += 4, idx += 4) {
> > >> ring[idx] = obj[i];
> > >> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ __rte_ring_dequeue_elems_64(struct rte_ring *r,
> > >> uint32_t prod_head,
> > >> const uint32_t size = r->size;
> > >> uint32_t idx = prod_head & r->mask;
> > >> uint64_t *ring = (uint64_t *)&r[1];
> > >> - uint64_t *obj = (uint64_t *)obj_table;
> > >> + unaligned_uint64_t *obj = (unaligned_uint64_t *)obj_table;
> > >> if (likely(idx + n < size)) {
> > >> for (i = 0; i < (n & ~0x3); i += 4, idx += 4) {
> > >> obj[i] = ring[idx];
> > >> --
> > >> 2.7.4
> > >>
> > >
> > > References:
> > >
> > https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_elem.h?id=3ba
> > 51478a3ab3132c33effc8b132641233275b36
> > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1583774395-10233-1-git-
> > send-email-phil.y...@arm.com/
> > >
