From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89CCAA0613 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 11:27:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFFE1BED7; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 11:27:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [148.163.129.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 889451BED1 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 11:27:10 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine Received: from webmail.solarflare.com (uk.solarflare.com [193.34.186.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1-us5.ppe-hosted.com (PPE Hosted ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id 605D3800062; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 09:27:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.38.17] (91.220.146.112) by ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:27:01 +0100 To: =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=c3=b8rup?= , CC: , , , References: <20190925120355.44821-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com> <20190925120355.44821-3-mb@smartsharesystems.com> From: Andrew Rybchenko Message-ID: <96d37240-9f33-3252-7e0a-fc8ab4fc136e@solarflare.com> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:26:57 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190925120355.44821-3-mb@smartsharesystems.com> Content-Language: en-GB X-Originating-IP: [91.220.146.112] X-ClientProxiedBy: ocex03.SolarFlarecom.com (10.20.40.36) To ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-12.5.0.1300-8.5.1010-24934.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No-9.075600-8.000000-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: +f/wAVSGjujmLzc6AOD8DfHkpkyUphL9NV9S7O+u3Kbg91xayX4L83Io zGa69omdrdoLblq9S5rMJYD0aRF0RUmENxFdlRTGzfqlpbtmcWh+tO36GYDlspGPHiE2kiT4AEO xGw6OfA3i4GjjICXYccIEF+d0zfpI56XkomU2m5X805SSvoAPN/ngX/aL8PCNJVPVJGRTGA1Y3j dLQGZneaRGASDuetHKr/EwLya77ldx6NqeNlYcmOa55w05lWyqIPwiH5Xl/Q+KsTAa7Oe+YixZV 2XdhwOwnX21KobcTTfNSMGwluLZGPz/jVa2JSBDhrO2+pxhVk8cDDLReGt4PfmUDxpFogQXo8WM kQWv6iWhMIDkR/KfwLkblkrgCLv4sjvNV98mpPMN5W6gFTOXELhdslX+lzp4sbYjGwVYbnUH9M+ qrVIchHS2/enjyQOdLQyH7aEos2ZABv2NsGk9pz4WYjg+F1zkzmgjcgRsMgQ= X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No X-TMASE-Result: 10--9.075600-8.000000 X-TMASE-Version: SMEX-12.5.0.1300-8.5.1010-24934.003 X-MDID: 1569490029-PWNUNvu3GBMd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] mbuf: add bulk free function 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 9/25/19 3:03 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: > Add function for freeing a bulk of mbufs. > > Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup > --- > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 16 +++++----------- > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > index 37718d49c..b63a0eced 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > @@ -245,6 +245,41 @@ int rte_mbuf_check(const struct rte_mbuf *m, int is_header, > return 0; > } > > +/** > + * Maximum bulk of mbufs rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk() returns to mempool. > + */ > +#define RTE_PKTMBUF_FREE_BULK_SZ 64 > + > +/* Free a bulk of mbufs back into their original mempools. */ > +void rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(struct rte_mbuf **mbufs, unsigned int count) > +{ > + struct rte_mbuf *m, *free[RTE_PKTMBUF_FREE_BULK_SZ]; > + unsigned int idx, nb_free = 0; > + > + for (idx = 0; idx < count; idx++) { > + m = mbufs[idx]; > + if (unlikely(m == NULL)) > + continue; > + > + __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 1); > + m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m); Who cares about next segments if any? It looks like nobody. > + if (unlikely(m == NULL)) > + continue; > + > + if (nb_free >= RTE_PKTMBUF_FREE_BULK_SZ || > + (nb_free > 0 && m->pool != free[0]->pool)) { > + rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, > + (void **)free, nb_free); > + nb_free = 0; > + } > + > + free[nb_free++] = m; > + } > + > + if (nb_free > 0) > + rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free); > +} > + > /* dump a mbuf on console */ > void > rte_pktmbuf_dump(FILE *f, const struct rte_mbuf *m, unsigned dump_len) > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h > index f2e174da1..6910b3fe6 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h > @@ -1908,21 +1908,15 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_free(struct rte_mbuf *m) > } > > /** > - * Free a bulk of mbufs back into their original mempool. > + * Free a bulk of mbufs back into their original mempools. > * > * @param mbufs > - * Array of pointers to mbufs > + * Array of pointers to mbufs. > + * The array may contain NULL pointers. > * @param count > - * Array size > + * Array size. > */ > -static inline void > -rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(struct rte_mbuf **mbufs, unsigned count) > -{ > - unsigned idx = 0; > - > - for (idx = 0; idx < count; idx++) > - rte_pktmbuf_free(mbufs[idx]); > -} > +void rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(struct rte_mbuf **mbufs, unsigned int count); > > /** > * Creates a "clone" of the given packet mbuf. Is it just a mistake that two patches are not squashed?