> From: Alan Elder [mailto:alan.el...@microsoft.com] > Sent: Monday, 15 April 2024 16.41 > > The previous code allowed the number of Tx queues to be set higher than the > number of Rx queues. If a packet was sent on a Tx queue with index > >= number Rx queues there was a segfault due to accessing beyond the end of > the dev->data->rx_queues[] array. > > #0 rte_spinlock_trylock (sl = invalid address) at /include/rte_spinlock.h L63 > #1 hn_process_events at /drivers/net/netvsc/hn_rxtx.c L 1129 > #2 hn_xmit_pkts at /drivers/net/netvsc/hn_rxtx.c L1553 > > This commit fixes the issue by creating an Rx queue for every Tx queue meaning > that an event buffer is allocated to handle receiving Tx completion messages. > > mbuf pool and Rx ring are not allocated for these additional Rx queues and RSS > configuration ensures that no packets are received on them. > > Fixes: 4e9c73e96e83 ("net/netvsc: add Hyper-V network device") > Cc: sthem...@microsoft.com > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Alan Elder <alan.el...@microsoft.com> > ---
Is there any requirements to the order the application must call rte_eth_rx_queue_setup() and rte_eth_tx_queue_setup()? I.e. does it work if rte_eth_tx_queue_setup() is called before rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(), and in the opposite order? Although the ethdev documentation says: "The functions exported by the application Ethernet API to setup a device designated by its port identifier must be invoked in the following order: rte_eth_dev_configure() rte_eth_tx_queue_setup() rte_eth_rx_queue_setup() rte_eth_dev_start()", I would assume the order of calling rte_eth_tx_queue_setup() and rte_eth_rx_queue_setup() doesn't matter. And the rte_eth_dev_reset() function documentation has rx/tx queue setup in the opposite order: "After calling rte_eth_dev_reset(), the application should use rte_eth_dev_configure(), rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(), rte_eth_tx_queue_setup(), and rte_eth_dev_start() to reconfigure the device as appropriate."
