From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CFB432D8; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 17:50:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4184E402BB; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 17:50:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pl1-f171.google.com (mail-pl1-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 383AE402A7 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 17:50:53 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pl1-f171.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1cc921a4632so59664545ad.1 for ; Wed, 08 Nov 2023 08:50:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1699462252; x=1700067052; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=dyc3ZVQ4l3SmZWH0CCDKBbV2YHkKyPSI6p4zYlF2f5c=; b=rPuvkFFZ8JOXf6TZo/HcaxnzSLS3sV43xrMAnkg0D3Irg9fN6W0ecdJsure0oCXTgH WXujNk29SfXXEaCMpXTdhwuTvryCbo/kkwgY5zL871UXP+R1YQh4oQJ4l/m7nxGZ5+iX GHLfnXICGDxUV/MLLoJ6EDvKlNqezRxCPV/X5DyQ4u7FKPGKz+pXxagL4+Issj7t/wcE Me0ZApiLrQ8VwjO5O18oiNeB8Hi+SZs+paQEn9yLWkr6aVyLGhxqBu5DIo5Q8NhoXgDu gpFG7Qs4qzEKV1aZkoXKvTdnlxTzKKSz503Epac5AQgXOegjo2qlwC8qNFJYdbz4qQ7h rwRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699462252; x=1700067052; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dyc3ZVQ4l3SmZWH0CCDKBbV2YHkKyPSI6p4zYlF2f5c=; b=Lnl+wpDJgmwW9k87VcBPkFjfefD+129K2uLvDtfiOweuQfMOCIBgYZeWJA7IljA9NU IC5zC127enCeSdA9hQwk4/pRQinANsuvmuCL+LEuCBZSoO0++erjQ/cC/INF5Eyczj0s 0XL3NjP6X6F/cPThqpA5672dzeVCPBf2N+hXcb38mTqkU74tY+uV+qO9C9nRIwTebZrL /PowXm7Z//E5R+r9YT8aTVYyGpYh3wJxjD04k4XJp6I7VRvOJlt9RamwtaEg7vcD1vaw SNZBbx5BLsMh8QlznwNbUKf9tPorFyjYFAd8Xks7X4obwNV1PbfK5RB1AQXF95hvvz0j Ma3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw5FW/JgewF4rrP32pm34t1FChPoaSFuH9kKcryqJmLDLbp5G2T 4kFPZkwA5rwhmzMYGjNbZXwmIw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGItlloCbSJx/uJ3ps4+KBendggDmm6rRQHnRXcRdPBrQMrrwIaL4L53Tp5Gluu8M9gsuAp+g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2342:b0:1cc:4cf7:2cd with SMTP id c2-20020a170903234200b001cc4cf702cdmr2993238plh.33.1699462252113; Wed, 08 Nov 2023 08:50:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-123-141.wavecable.com. [204.195.123.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q22-20020a170902789600b001c5fc291ef9sm1965794pll.209.2023.11.08.08.50.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Nov 2023 08:50:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 08:50:49 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Morten =?UTF-8?B?QnLDuHJ1cA==?= Cc: "David Marchand" , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] dumpcap: fix mbuf pool ring type Message-ID: <20231108085049.7744425c@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9EFEC@smartserver.smartshare.dk> References: <20230804161604.61050-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D87C27@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <20231106112331.690cc454@hermes.local> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9EFE6@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <20231106183618.79ab6f93@hermes.local> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9EFE8@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <20231107084113.1bff7d9e@hermes.local> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9EFEC@smartserver.smartshare.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 18:38:32 +0100 Morten Br=C3=B8rup wrote: > > If user decides to use a thread unsafe mempool, wouldn't it break in > > every PMD as well. =20 >=20 > Yes, except if the application only uses one thread for packet processing= . Then thread safety is not necessary. >=20 If application only used single thread then single consumer pool would work= fine for dumpcap. Only the primary thread would ever allocate. But both secondar= y and primary could be freeing mbuf.