> On 12/1/2023 3:00 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
> >> On 11/30/2023 8:52 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
> >>> Fix the resource leak problem in the exit logic of CoreNIC firmware.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: 646ea79ce481 ("net/nfp: move PF functions into its own file")
> >>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Long Wu <long...@corigine.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Peng Zhang <peng.zh...@corigine.com>
> >>
> >> <...>
> >>
> >>> +static int
> >>> +nfp_pf_secondary_uninit(struct nfp_pf_dev *pf_dev) {
> >>> + free(pf_dev->sym_tbl);
> >>> + rte_free(pf_dev);
> >>> +
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> /* Reset and stop device. The device can not be restarted. */
> >>> static int nfp_net_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) @@ -333,14
> >>> +381,25 @@ nfp_net_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> >>> struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev;
> >>> struct nfp_app_fw_nic *app_fw_nic;
> >>>
> >>> - if (rte_eal_process_type() != RTE_PROC_PRIMARY)
> >>> - return 0;
> >>> -
> >>> hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> >>> pf_dev = hw->pf_dev;
> >>> pci_dev = RTE_ETH_DEV_TO_PCI(dev);
> >>> app_fw_nic = NFP_PRIV_TO_APP_FW_NIC(pf_dev->app_fw_priv);
> >>>
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * In secondary process, a released eth device can be found by its
> >> name
> >>> + * in shared memory.
> >>> + * If the state of the eth device is RTE_ETH_DEV_UNUSED, it means the
> >>> + * eth device has been released.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_SECONDARY) {
> >>> + if (dev->state == RTE_ETH_DEV_UNUSED)
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> +
> >>> + nfp_pf_secondary_uninit(pf_dev);
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>>
> >>
> >> Mostly expectation is secondary process doesn't free shared
> >> resources, but init and free done by primary process.
> >
> > I agree.
> > Maybe the comment here make reader a little confused.
> > But the `nfp_pf_secondary_uninit()` does not free any shared resources, it
> only free two memory which private to each secondary process.
> >
>
> What freed is not process private, it is in the shared memory:
>
> hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> pf_dev = hw->pf_dev;
> rte_free(pf_dev);
>
>
> And when there are multiple secondaries, one of them frees `pf_dev`, how
> this is not effecting others that may use `pf_dev`?
Oh, I see what you mean now.
I will a v2 patch to fix this.
Thanks.
>
> >> When there are multiple secondaries active, and if one of them closes
> >> the port, will system behave properly? Can you please double check above
> logic?
> >
> > Yes, the system behave properly.
> >
