From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F78ED4E0 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 19:25:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2017 10:25:10 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,346,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="52717737" Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2017 10:25:09 -0800 Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.38]) by IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.230]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:25:08 +0000 From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: "Yigit, Ferruh" , Stephen Hemminger CC: Sergey Vyazmitinov , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: use bulk functions to allocate and free mbufs Thread-Index: AQHSbCZ0kPj1UHLXZU+5SG545LdluKEzhxEAgAAC+YCAAAD4EIAAAk4AgAAF2+A= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:25:07 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F104048@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1483048216-2936-1-git-send-email-s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com> <20170111081759.7b1ee146@xeon-e3> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F103F8F@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170111093559.753a0fc9@xeon-e3> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F103FCA@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <63819ae1-f056-0ad7-b7dd-041fe1fe08fa@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <63819ae1-f056-0ad7-b7dd-041fe1fe08fa@intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: use bulk functions to allocate and free mbufs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:25:11 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Yigit, Ferruh > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 5:48 PM > To: Ananyev, Konstantin ; Stephen Hemminger= > Cc: Sergey Vyazmitinov ; olivier.matz@6wind.= com; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: use bulk functions to allocate and f= ree mbufs >=20 > On 1/11/2017 5:43 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org] > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 5:36 PM > >> To: Ananyev, Konstantin > >> Cc: Sergey Vyazmitinov ; olivier.matz@6wi= nd.com; Yigit, Ferruh ; > dev@dpdk.org > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: use bulk functions to allocate an= d free mbufs > >> > >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:28:21 +0000 > >> "Ananyev, Konstantin" wrote: > >> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemming= er > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 4:18 PM > >>>> To: Sergey Vyazmitinov > >>>> Cc: olivier.matz@6wind.com; Yigit, Ferruh ; = dev@dpdk.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: use bulk functions to allocate = and free mbufs > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 04:50:16 +0700 > >>>> Sergey Vyazmitinov wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> /** > >>>>> + * Free n packets mbuf back into its original mempool. > >>>>> + * > >>>>> + * Free each mbuf, and all its segments in case of chained buffers= . Each > >>>>> + * segment is added back into its original mempool. > >>>>> + * > >>>>> + * @param mp > >>>>> + * The packets mempool. > >>>>> + * @param mbufs > >>>>> + * The packets mbufs array to be freed. > >>>>> + * @param n > >>>>> + * Number of packets. > >>>>> + */ > >>>>> +static inline void rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, > >>>>> + struct rte_mbuf **mbufs, unsigned n) > >>>>> +{ > >>>>> + struct rte_mbuf *mbuf, *m_next; > >>>>> + unsigned i; > >>>>> + for (i =3D 0; i < n; ++i) { > >>>>> + mbuf =3D mbufs[i]; > >>>>> + __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(mbuf, 1); > >>>>> + > >>>>> + mbuf =3D mbuf->next; > >>>>> + while (mbuf !=3D NULL) { > >>>>> + m_next =3D mbuf->next; > >>>>> + rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(mbuf); > >>>>> + mbuf =3D m_next; > >>>>> + } > >>>>> + } > >>>>> + rte_mempool_put_bulk(mp, (void * const *)mbufs, n); > >>>>> +} > >>>> > >>>> The mbufs may come from different pools. You need to handle that. > >>> > >>> I suppose both stituations are possible: > >>> 1) user knows off-hand that all mbufs in the group are from the same = mempool > >>> 2) user can't guarantee that all mbufs in the group are from same mem= pool. > >>> > >>> As I understand that patch is for case 1) only. > >>> For 2) it could be a separate function and separate patch. > >>> > >>> Konstantin > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Please don't make unnecessary assumptions in pursuit of minor optimiza= tions. > > > > I don't suggest to make *any* assumptions. > > What I am saying we can have 2 functions for two different cases. >=20 > kni_free_mbufs() is static function. Even user knows if all mbufs are > some same pool or not, can't pass this information to the free function. >=20 > Of course this information can be passed via new API, or as an update to > exiting API, but I think it is better to update free function to cover > both cases instead of getting this information from user. I suppose misunderstanding came from the fact that kni_free_mbufs() is modified to use rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(mp, mbufs, n). I am not talking about kni part of the patch (to be honest I didn't pay much attention to it). What I am saying there are many situations when user knows off-hand that all mbufs in that group are from the same mempool and such function will be useful too. BTW, for my own curiosity, how it could happen with KNI that=20 kni_fifo_get() would return mbufs not from kni->pktmbuf_pool (I am not really familiar with KNI and its use-cases)? Konstantin >=20 > > Obviously we'll have to document it properly. > > Konstantin > > > >> It is trivial to write a correct free bulk that handles pool changing. > >> Also the free_seg could be bulked as well.