I can't tell from your code, but you assigned nb_rx to the number of packets received, but then used vec_size, which might be larger. Does this happen if you use nb_rx in your loops?
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 5:59 AM Alex Kiselev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 1 июня 2020 г., в 19:17, Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > написал(а): > > > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 15:24:25 +0200 > > Alex Kiselev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> I've got a segmentation fault error in my data plane path. > >> I am pretty sure the code where the segfault happened is ok, > >> so my guess is that I somehow received a corrupted mbuf. > >> How could I troubleshoot this? Is there any way? > >> Is it possible that other threads of the application > >> corrupted that mbuf? > >> > >> I would really appriciate any advice. > >> Thanks. > >> > >> DPDK 18.11.3 > >> NIC: 82599ES > >> > >> Code: > >> > >> nb_rx = rte_eth_rx_burst(port_id, queue_id, pkts_burst, > >> MAX_PKT_BURST); > >> > >> ... > >> > >> for (i=0; i < vec_size; i++) { > >> rte_prefetch0(rte_pktmbuf_mtod(m_v[i], void *)); > >> > >> for (i=0; i < vec_size; i++) { > >> m = m_v[i]; > >> eth_hdr = rte_pktmbuf_mtod(m, struct ether_hdr *); > >> eth_type = rte_be_to_cpu_16(eth_hdr->ether_type); <--- > >> Segmentation fault > >> ... > >> > >> #0 rte_arch_bswap16 (_x=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory > >> at address 0x4d80000000053010>) > > > > Build with as many of the debug options turned on in the DPDK config, > > and build with EXTRA_CFLAGS of -g. > > Could using an incorrect (a very big one) value of mbuf pkt_len and > data_len while transmitting cause mbuf corruption and following > segmentation fault on rx? >
