On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 02:19:55PM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>
> > >>
> > >> Hi Olivier,
> > >>
> > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
> > whatever
> > >> the
> > value
> > >> of m->next,
> > >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Olivier,
> >>
> >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
> whatever
> >> the
> value
> >> of m->next,
> >>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is
> >> !=
> 1.
> >> For
> >> in
On 11/6/20 3:23 PM, Morten Brørup wrote:
From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 12:54 PM
Hi Olivier,
m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
whatever
the
value
of m->next,
because it can happen that m->nb_seg is
!=
1.
For
instance
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: dev On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 7:00 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: konstantin.anan...@intel.com; sta...@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free
>
I can reproduce t
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 12:54 PM
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
> > > whatever
> > > > > the
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
> > whatever
> > > > the
> > > > > > value
> > > > > > > > of m->next,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is !=
> > 1.
>
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 11:05 AM
>
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:50:45AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 9:21 AM
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 a
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:50:45AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 9:21 AM
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:52:58AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 9:21 AM
>
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:52:58AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 12:55 AM
> > >
> > > > > > > >
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:52:58AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 12:55 AM
> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.anan...@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 12:55 AM
>
> > > > > > > > > >> Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the
> value
> > > of m->next,
> > > > > > > > > >>> because it can
> > > > > > > > >> Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value
> > of m->next,
> > > > > > > > >>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For
> > instance in this
> > > > > > > > >>> case:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev,
> Konstantin
> Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 2:56 PM
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:34:18AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Ry
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:34:18AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > > > > > On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, K
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:14:07PM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:34:18AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > > > > On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > >
>
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:34:18AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > > > On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > > >>
> >
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:34:18AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > > On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Olivier,
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Olivier,
> > >>
> > >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:26:51AM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Olivier,
> >>
> >>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
> >>> because
Just resend with lost Cc restored.
On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
>>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For in
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 09:33:58AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 8:46 AM
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Olivier,
> > >
> > > > m->nb
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 8:46 AM
>
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> > Hi Olivier,
> >
> > > m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
> > > because it
On 11/5/20 10:46 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>>> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
>>> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For instance in this
>>> case:
>>>
>>> m
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:15:49AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> > m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
> > because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For instance in this
> > case:
> >
> > m1 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
> > rte_pktmbuf
Hi Olivier,
> m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
> because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For instance in this
> case:
>
> m1 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
> rte_pktmbuf_append(m1, 500);
> m2 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
> rte_pktmbuf_append(m2, 500);
>
m->nb_seg must be reset on mbuf free whatever the value of m->next,
because it can happen that m->nb_seg is != 1. For instance in this
case:
m1 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
rte_pktmbuf_append(m1, 500);
m2 = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(mp);
rte_pktmbuf_append(m2, 500);
rte_pktmbuf_chain(m1, m2);
m0 =
26 matches
Mail list logo
