Hi Gaetan Agree, will send V2.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Gaëtan Rivet [mailto:gaetan.ri...@6wind.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 3:52 PM > To: Matan Azrad <ma...@mellanox.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/failsafe: fix Rx interrupt reinstallation > > Hi Matan, > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:59:32PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote: > > Fail-safe dev_start() operation can be called by both the application > > and the hot-plug alarm mechanism. > > > > The installation of Rx interrupt are triggered from dev_start() in any > > time it is called while actually the Rx interrupt should be installed > > only by the application calls. > > > > So, each plug-in event causes reinstallation which causes memory leak. > > > > Trigger the Rx interrupt installation only for application calls. > > > > Fixes: 9e0360aebf23 ("net/failsafe: register as Rx interrupt mode") > > > > Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <ma...@mellanox.com> > > --- > > drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c | 10 ++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > > b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > > index 057e435..bbbd335 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_ops.c > > @@ -181,10 +181,12 @@ > > int ret; > > > > fs_lock(dev, 0); > > - ret = failsafe_rx_intr_install(dev); > > - if (ret) { > > - fs_unlock(dev, 0); > > - return ret; > > + if (PRIV(dev)->alarm_lock == 0) { > > I dislike having to rely on unrelated context of execution to decide a code- > path. > > I'd prefer to make interrupt installation dependent on the interrupt state > instead. > > I think it should be possible to forbid reinstallation within > failsafe_rx_intr_install directly, e.g. > > diff --git a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_intr.c > b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_intr.c > index f6ff04dc8..46c3aa5f2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_intr.c > +++ b/drivers/net/failsafe/failsafe_intr.c > @@ -523,7 +523,8 @@ failsafe_rx_intr_install(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > const struct rte_intr_conf *const intr_conf = > &priv->dev->data->dev_conf.intr_conf; > > - if (intr_conf->rxq == 0) > + if (intr_conf->rxq == 0 || > + dev->intr_handle != NULL) > return 0; > if (fs_rx_intr_vec_install(priv) < 0) > return -rte_errno; > > This way the logic is self-dependent and the check limited to this component. > > There might be better way to do this, it's only an example to explain my > point. > > > + ret = failsafe_rx_intr_install(dev); > > + if (ret) { > > + fs_unlock(dev, 0); > > + return ret; > > + } > > } > > FOREACH_SUBDEV(sdev, i, dev) { > > if (sdev->state != DEV_ACTIVE) > > -- > > 1.9.5 > > > > -- > Gaëtan Rivet > 6WIND
