Commit 0bb4f9ec authored by Maciej Fijalkowski's avatar Maciej Fijalkowski Committed by Tony Nguyen

ice: unify xdp_rings accesses

There has been a long lasting issue of improper xdp_rings indexing for
XDP_TX and XDP_REDIRECT actions. Given that currently rx_ring->q_index
is mixed with smp_processor_id(), there could be a situation where Tx
descriptors are produced onto XDP Tx ring, but tail is never bumped -
for example pin a particular queue id to non-matching IRQ line.

Address this problem by ignoring the user ring count setting and always
initialize the xdp_rings array to be of num_possible_cpus() size. Then,
always use the smp_processor_id() as an index to xdp_rings array. This
provides serialization as at given time only a single softirq can run on
a particular CPU.
Signed-off-by: default avatarMaciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Tested-by: default avatarGeorge Kuruvinakunnel <george.kuruvinakunnel@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarTony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
parent e72bba21
......@@ -3215,7 +3215,7 @@ int ice_vsi_rebuild(struct ice_vsi *vsi, bool init_vsi)
ice_vsi_map_rings_to_vectors(vsi);
if (ice_is_xdp_ena_vsi(vsi)) {
vsi->num_xdp_txq = vsi->alloc_rxq;
vsi->num_xdp_txq = num_possible_cpus();
ret = ice_prepare_xdp_rings(vsi, vsi->xdp_prog);
if (ret)
goto err_vectors;
......
......@@ -2638,7 +2638,7 @@ ice_xdp_setup_prog(struct ice_vsi *vsi, struct bpf_prog *prog,
}
if (!ice_is_xdp_ena_vsi(vsi) && prog) {
vsi->num_xdp_txq = vsi->alloc_rxq;
vsi->num_xdp_txq = num_possible_cpus();
xdp_ring_err = ice_prepare_xdp_rings(vsi, prog);
if (xdp_ring_err)
NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Setting up XDP Tx resources failed");
......
......@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ void ice_finalize_xdp_rx(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring, unsigned int xdp_res)
if (xdp_res & ICE_XDP_TX) {
struct ice_tx_ring *xdp_ring =
rx_ring->vsi->xdp_rings[rx_ring->q_index];
rx_ring->vsi->xdp_rings[smp_processor_id()];
ice_xdp_ring_update_tail(xdp_ring);
}
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment