From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6441B37C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:59:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lfbn-lil-1-110-231.w90-45.abo.wanadoo.fr ([90.45.197.231]
 helo=droids-corp.org)
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
 (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1eSNxX-0006bW-EB; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:06:00 +0100
Received: by droids-corp.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
 Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:59:30 +0100
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:59:30 +0100
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20171222135929.ei35n7gs55u3jqvr@platinum>
References: <1512563473-19969-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
 <20171219102456.ghipiyb2ig43d4nk@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
 <830d3e36-921b-ef7a-51a4-6d135b15e973@nxp.com>
 <20171219110204.uqxw4xy66o65pnjz@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
 <9adf0fc2-b233-26c6-b866-236d6277a4ed@nxp.com>
 <42572f99-99bd-ee70-e631-b817d1d679ac@nxp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <42572f99-99bd-ee70-e631-b817d1d679ac@nxp.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mempool: indicate the usages of multi
	memzones
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 13:59:38 -0000

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 05:29:59PM +0530, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> On 12/19/2017 6:38 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> > 
> > > That's true, I commented too fast :)
> > > And what about using mp->nb_mem_chunks instead? Would it do the job
> > > in your use-case?
> > 
> > It should work.  Let me check it out.
> 
> There is a slight problem with nb_mem_chunks.
> 
> It is getting incremented in the end of "rte_mempool_populate_phys",
> while the elements are getting populated before it in the call of
> mempool_add_elem.
> 
> I can use nb_mem_chunks are '0' check. However it can break in future if
> mempool_populate_phys changes.

Sorry, I'm not sure I'm getting what you say.

My question was about using mp->nb_mem_chunks instead of a new flag in the
dppa driver. Am I missing something?