Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

gt; Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 4:54 AM > To: Florin Coras <fcoras.li...@gmail.com <mailto:fcoras.li...@gmail.com>> > Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access > > Hi Florin, > &

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

it might be > quicker? > > > Cheers, > Marco > > > > D. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Dave Barach (dbarach) > > Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 3:29 PM > > To: Ray Kinsella <m...@ashroe.eu>; vpp-dev@lists.

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

<dbar...@cisco.com>; Ray Kinsella <m...@ashroe.eu>; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Hi Dave, On Wed, 2018-05-02 at 19:20 +, Dave Barach wrote: > Quick update. I added the obvious ASSERT, and immediately found a > couple of non-c

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

iginal Message- > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Ray Kinsella > Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 10:58 AM > To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access > > Is it worth to use an assert (or similar) to valid

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

--Original Message- From: Dave Barach (dbarach) Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 3:29 PM To: Ray Kinsella <m...@ashroe.eu>; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Hey Ray, That's a good idea, and none too hard to implement. It's on my list. I'm a bit

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

10:58 AM To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Is it worth to use an assert (or similar) to validate the assumption in the debug build at least. Well at least until the compiler bugs get's sorted? Ray K On 26/04/2018 17:08, Dave Barach wrote:

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

dev@lists.fd.io> *On Behalf Of *Radu Nicolau *Sent:* Thursday, April 26, 2018 4:54 AM *To:* Florin Coras <fcoras.li...@gmail.com> *Cc:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io *Subject:* Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Hi Florin, Thanks! The patch fixes the issue. Any idea why is it happeni

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

gt; > > *From:* Dave Barach (dbarach) [mailto:dbar...@cisco.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, April 26, 2018 5:08 PM > *To:* Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com>; Florin Coras < > fcoras.li...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > *Subject:* RE: [vpp-dev] segfault due

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

errors. > > Below is the link with some code to play around: > https://godbolt.org/g/7RDBQG > > Regards, > Sergio > > > > From: Radu Nicolau > > Sent: Friday 27 April 2018 10:34 > > To: Dave Barach (dbarach); > Florin Coras > > Cc: vpp-dev@li

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

April 2018 10:34 To: Dave Barach (dbarach)<mailto:dbar...@cisco.com>; Florin Coras<mailto:fcoras.li...@gmail.com> Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Thanks for looking into it! In addition, If I und

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

...@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 5:08 PM To: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com>; Florin Coras <fcoras.li...@gmail.com> Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Yes, it’s arguably a compiler bug. But, it makes no sense to vec_vali

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

as ensuring that objects are sized correctly. D. From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Radu Nicolau Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 4:54 AM To: Florin Coras <fcoras.li...@gmail.com> Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligne

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

@lists.fd.io> > [mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>] On Behalf Of Florin > Coras > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 4:13 PM > To: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com <mailto:radu.nico...@intel.com>> > Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailt

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

sts.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Hi Radu, Making the crypto_worker_main_t a full cache line in size (see patch [1]) seems to solve the issue. Could you confirm? Florin [1] https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/12086/ On Apr 24,

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com <mailto:radu.nico...@intel.com>> > Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access > > Hi Radu, > > Making the crypto_worker_main_t a full cache line in size (see patch [

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access Hi Radu, Making the crypto_worker_main_t a full cache line in size (see patch [1]) seems to solve the issue. Could you confirm? Florin [1] https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/12086/ On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Radu Nicolau <radu.nico...@

Re: [vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

Hi Radu, Making the crypto_worker_main_t a full cache line in size (see patch [1]) seems to solve the issue. Could you confirm? Florin [1] https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/12086/ > On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Radu Nicolau wrote: > >

[vpp-dev] segfault due to movaps unaligned access

Hello all, We're seeing a weird issue, that is a segfault that looks to be caused by a movaps instruction that is trying to access an address that is not 16 byte aligned. The call originates from a vec_validate_init_empty_aligned that has the argument aligned to 16 bytes. I have seen something