From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni <gopakumar.c.e@gmail.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, olivier.matz@6wind.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] dpdk 16.07, issues with rte_mempool_create and rte_kni_alloc()
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 17:14:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57A369E2.6070506@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABK1yFAhLBHEkR_pgi0UwoyWjZdGoRS3BCWR0mAaN5J=gRm3Qg@mail.gmail.com>
On 8/1/2016 10:19 PM, Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni wrote:
> Well, for my purpose I just ended up creating a seperate/smaller pool
> earlier during bootup to try to guarantee its from one memseg.
>
> But I am assuming that this KNI restriction is something thats "currently"
> not fixed and is "fixable" ?
> Any ideas on what the summary of the reason
> for this restriction is - I was gonna check if I can fix that
KNI expects all mbufs are from a physically continuous memory. This is
because of current address translation implementation.
mbufs allocated in userspace and accessed from both user and kernel
space, so mbuf userspace virtual address needs to be converted into
kernelspace virtual address.
Currently this address translation done by first calculating an offset
between virtual addresses using first filed of mempool, later applying
same offset to all mbufs. This is why all mbufs should be in physically
continuous memory.
I think this address translation can be done in different way which can
remove the restriction, but not sure about the effect of the
performance. I will send a patch for this.
Regards,
ferruh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-04 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-31 5:39 Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
2016-08-01 21:19 ` Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
2016-08-04 16:14 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2016-08-10 10:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-08-25 13:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-08-25 14:19 ` Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57A369E2.6070506@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gopakumar.c.e@gmail.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).