On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 06:56:00PM +0100, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/06/15 18:00, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 05:44:19PM +0100, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> >>And change the behaviour in linux-generic implementation, where it's 
> >>releasing
> >>it during the call.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss <[email protected]>
> >>---
> >>  example/packet/odp_pktio.c                 |  9 ++++++++-
> >>  platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c     | 10 +++++++++-
> >>  platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_socket.c |  6 ------
> >>  test/performance/odp_l2fwd.c               | 11 +++++++++--
> >>  4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/example/packet/odp_pktio.c b/example/packet/odp_pktio.c
> >>index f08d9f4..4242caa 100644
> >>--- a/example/packet/odp_pktio.c
> >>+++ b/example/packet/odp_pktio.c
> >>@@ -282,9 +282,16 @@ static void *pktio_ifburst_thread(void *arg)
> >>                    /* Drop packets with errors */
> >>                    pkts_ok = drop_err_pkts(pkt_tbl, pkts);
> >>                    if (pkts_ok > 0) {
> >>+                           int sent;
> >>                            /* Swap Eth MACs and IP-addrs */
> >>                            swap_pkt_addrs(pkt_tbl, pkts_ok);
> >>-                           odp_pktio_send(pktio, pkt_tbl, pkts_ok);
> >>+                           sent = odp_pktio_send(pktio, pkt_tbl, pkts_ok);
> >>+                           if (odp_unlikely(sent < pkts_ok)) {
> >>+                                   err_cnt += pkts_ok - sent;
> >>+                                   do
> >>+                                           
> >>odp_packet_free(pkt_tbl[sent++]);
> >>+                                   while (++sent < pkts_ok);
> >
> >You're incrementing sent twice.
> 
> Indeed, I'll fix that.
> 
> >
> >>+                           }
> >>                    }
> >>
> >>                    if (odp_unlikely(pkts_ok != pkts))
> >>diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c 
> >>b/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c
> >>index 5ae24b9..6e7db41 100644
> >>--- a/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c
> >>+++ b/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c
> >>@@ -564,6 +564,9 @@ int pktout_enqueue(queue_entry_t *qentry, 
> >>odp_buffer_hdr_t *buf_hdr)
> >>    int nbr;
> >>
> >>    nbr = odp_pktio_send(qentry->s.pktout, &pkt, len);
> >>+   if (odp_unlikely(nbr == 0))
> >>+           odp_packet_free(pkt);
> >>+
> >
> >Why do this here rather than letting the caller of enqueue decide how
> >to deal with the failure?
> 
> This is bringing up an another issue: we should define the same
> behaviour for odp_queue_enq() and odp_queue_enq_multi(), shouldn't
> we?
> 

Yes, Leo mentioned that in the egress API document.

> >
> >>    return (nbr == len ? 0 : -1);
> >>  }
> >>
> >>@@ -583,7 +586,12 @@ int pktout_enq_multi(queue_entry_t *qentry, 
> >>odp_buffer_hdr_t *buf_hdr[],
> >>    for (i = 0; i < num; ++i)
> >>            pkt_tbl[i] = _odp_packet_from_buffer(buf_hdr[i]->handle.handle);
> >>
> >>-   nbr = odp_pktio_send(qentry->s.pktout, pkt_tbl, num);
> >>+   i = nbr = odp_pktio_send(qentry->s.pktout, pkt_tbl, num);
> >>+   if (odp_unlikely(i < num))
> >>+           do
> >>+                   odp_packet_free(pkt_tbl[i]);
> >>+           while (++i < num);
> >>+
> >
> >Same comment as above.
> >
> >>    return nbr;
> >>  }
> >>
> >>diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_socket.c 
> >>b/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_socket.c
> >>index 9272146..309980d 100644
> >>--- a/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_socket.c
> >>+++ b/platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_socket.c
> >>@@ -301,9 +301,6 @@ int send_pkt_sock_basic(pkt_sock_t *const pkt_sock,
> >>    }                       /* end while */
> >>    nb_tx = i;
> >>
> >>-   for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
> >>-           odp_packet_free(pkt_table[i]);
> >>-
> >
> >Now packets that were actually sent are being leaked.
> I'll fix these too
> 

By the way I submitted a patch (https://patches.linaro.org/46723/) a
while back to tidy up the handling of transmit errors in odp_packet_socket.c.
There's an outstanding comment I need to address, I'll send an updated
version later today or tomorrow.

-- 
Stuart.
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp

Reply via email to