On 3/7/2016 3:04 PM, Xie, Huawei wrote: > On 3/7/2016 2:49 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 06:38:42AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: >>> On 3/7/2016 2:35 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: >>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 06:22:25AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: >>>>> On 2/18/2016 9:48 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: >>>>>> + uint16_t idx = vq->avail->ring[avail_idx & (vq->size - 1)]; >>>>>> + uint32_t vec_id = *vec_idx; >>>>>> + uint32_t len = *allocated; >>>>>> >>>>> There is bug not using volatile to retrieve the avail idx. >>>> avail_idx? This is actually from "vq->last_used_idx_res". >>> uint16_t idx = vq->avail->ring[avail_idx & (vq->size - 1)] >>> >>> the idx retrieved from avail->ring. >> Hmm.. I saw quite many similar lines of code retrieving an index from >> avail->ring, but none of them acutally use "volatile". So, a bug? > Others are not. This function is inline, and is in one translation unit > with its caller.
Oh, my fault. For the avail idx, we should take care on whether using volatile. >> --yliu >> >
