Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mempool: introduce indexed memory pool

[Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 8:59 PM Xueming(Steven) Li
<xuemingl@mellanox.com> wrote:
>
>
> >From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> >Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2019 8:28 PM
> >
> >On Fri, 18 Oct, 2019, 3:40 pm Xueming(Steven) Li, <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jerin Jacob <mailto:jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 12:41 AM
> >> To: Xueming(Steven) Li <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com>
> >> Cc: Olivier Matz <mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Andrew Rybchenko
> >> <mailto:arybchenko@solarflare.com>; dpdk-dev <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>; Asaf Penso
> >> <mailto:asafp@mellanox.com>; Ori Kam <mailto:orika@mellanox.com>; Stephen
> >> Hemminger <mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mempool: introduce indexed memory pool
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:43 PM Xueming(Steven) Li
> >> <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: Jerin Jacob <mailto:jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> >> > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 3:14 PM
> >> > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com>
> >> > > Cc: Olivier Matz <mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Andrew Rybchenko
> >> > > <mailto:arybchenko@solarflare.com>; dpdk-dev <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>; Asaf Penso
> >> > > <mailto:asafp@mellanox.com>; Ori Kam <mailto:orika@mellanox.com>
> >> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mempool: introduce indexed memory pool
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:25 PM Xueming Li <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Indexed memory pool manages memory entries by index, allocation
> >> > > > from pool returns both memory pointer and index(ID). users save ID
> >> > > > as u32 or less(u16) instead of traditional 8 bytes pointer. Memory
> >> > > > could be retrieved from pool or returned to pool later by index.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Pool allocates backend memory in chunk on demand, pool size grows
> >> > > > dynamically. Bitmap is used to track entry usage in chunk, thus
> >> > > > management overhead is one bit per entry.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Standard rte_malloc demands malloc overhead(64B) and minimal data
> >> > > > size(64B). This pool aims to such cost saving also pointer size.
> >> > > > For scenario like creating millions of rte_flows each consists of
> >> > > > small pieces of memories, the difference is huge.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Like standard memory pool, this lightweight pool only support
> >> > > > fixed size memory allocation. Pools should be created for each
> >> > > > different size.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > To facilitate memory allocated by index, a set of ILIST_XXX macro
> >> > > > defined to operate entries as regular LIST.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > By setting entry size to zero, pool can be used as ID generator.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <mailto:xuemingl@mellanox.com>
> >> > > > ---
> >> > > >  lib/librte_mempool/Makefile                |   3 +-
> >> > > >  lib/librte_mempool/rte_indexed_pool.c      | 289
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > > >  lib/librte_mempool/rte_indexed_pool.h      | 224 ++++++++++++++++
> >> > >
> >> > > Can this be abstracted over the driver interface instead of creating a new
> >> APIS?
> >> > > ie using drivers/mempool/
> >> >
> >> > The driver interface manage memory entries with pointers, while this api
> >> uses u32 index as key...
> >>
> >> I see. As a use case, it makes sense to me.
> >
> >> Have you checked the possibility reusing/extending
> >> lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bitmap.h for bitmap management,
> >> instead of rolling a new one?
> >
> >Yes, the rte_bitmap designed for fixed bitmap size, to grow, have to copy almost entire bitmap(array1+array2).
> >This pool distribute array2 into each trunk, and the trunk array actually plays the array1 role.
> >When growing, just grow array1 which is smaller, no touch to existing array2 in each trunk.
> >
> >IMO, Growing bit map is generic problem so moving bitmap management logic to common place will be usefull for other libraries in future. My suggestion would be to enchanse rte_bitmap to support dynamic bitmap through new APIs.
> >
> Interesting that people always think this api a bitmap, now start to realize it meaningful, memory just an optional attachment storage to each bit :)
> I'll append missing api like set bitmap by index, then move it to eal common folder, the header file should be rte_bitmap2.h?

+ cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com(rte_bitmap.h maintainer) for any comments.

rte_bitmap2.h may not be an intuitive name. One option could behave
separate APIs for the new case in rte_bitmap.h. No strong opinions on
the code organization in eal.


>
> >
> >
> >The map_xxx() naming might confused people, I'll make following change in next version:
> >        map_get()/map_set(): only used once and the code is simple, move code into caller.
> >        map_is_empty()/map_clear()/ : unused, remove
> >        map_clear_any(): relative simple, embed into caller.
> >