From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Ilya Matveychikov <matvejchikov@gmail.com>
Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: remove redundant line in rte_pktmbuf_attach
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:19:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170124171918.5102c3b9@glumotte.dev.6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7040BD38-C057-41F1-888A-32922934C148@gmail.com>
On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:57:13 +0400, Ilya Matveychikov
<matvejchikov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 2017, at 4:56 PM, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 16:28:29 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ilya
> >>> Matveychikov Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 3:08 PM
> >>> To: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: remove redundant line in
> >>> rte_pktmbuf_attach
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Jan 20, 2017, at 4:08 PM, Ferruh Yigit
> >>>> <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/20/2017 12:19 AM, Ilya Matveychikov wrote:
> >>>>> mi->next will be assigned to NULL few lines later, trivial patch
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya V. Matveychikov <matvejchikov@gmail.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 1 -
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> >>>>> b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h index ead7c6e..5589d54 100644
> >>>>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> >>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> >>>>> @@ -1139,7 +1139,6 @@ static inline void
> >>>>> rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
> >>>>> mi->buf_addr = m->buf_addr; mi->buf_len = m->buf_len;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - mi->next = m->next;
> >>>>
> >
> > Fixes: ea672a8b1655 ("mbuf: remove the rte_pktmbuf structure")
> >
> > Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> >
> >
> >>>> Do you know why attaching mbuf is not supporting
> >>>> multi-segment?
> >>
> >> This is supported, but you have to do it segment by segment.
> >> Actually rte_pktmbuf_clone() does that.
> >> Konstantin
> >>
> >>
> >>>> Perhaps this can be documented in function comment, as one of the
> >>>> "not supported" items.
> >>>
> >>> No, I don’t know. For my application I’ve found that nb_segs with
> >>> it’s limit in 256 segments is very annoying and I’ve decided not
> >>> to use DPDK functions that dealt with nb_segs… But it is not
> >>> about the rte_pktmbuf_attach() function and the patch.
> >
> >
> > Out of curiosity, can you explain why your application needs more
> > than 256 segments? When we were discussing the possibility of
> > extending this field to 16 bits, Konstantin convinced me that it
> > was not so useful.
>
> In my application I need to do IPv4 fragments reassembly. There is no
> explicit limit of number of fragments in datagram, so I’m trying to
> avoid any limitations and `nb_segs` here is a constraint for me.
> Expanding it from 8-bit to 16-bit can solve that issue for me. But I
> don’t remember are there any other places in DPDK where we need to
> know how many segments are in the packet? I mean that is `nb_segs`
> required at all?
>
Yes, it is used for instance in some PMDs to know how many tx ring
descriptors are needed to send a packet.
Thank you for the explanation. As you probably seen, I'm proposing to
extend the nb_segs to 16 bits in my latest RFC patchset.
Regards,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-24 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-20 0:19 Ilya Matveychikov
2017-01-20 12:08 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-21 15:08 ` Ilya Matveychikov
2017-01-21 16:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-24 12:56 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-01-24 15:57 ` Ilya Matveychikov
2017-01-24 16:19 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2017-01-30 8:57 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=20170124171918.5102c3b9@glumotte.dev.6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=matvejchikov@gmail.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).