From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>,
"Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio" <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>,
"Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC] mbuf/ip_frag: Move mbuf chaining to common code
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2015 11:35:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55ED5A6A.1000803@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836A83CBA@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
Hi,
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> index 8c2db1b..ef47256 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>>> @@ -1801,6 +1801,29 @@ static inline int rte_pktmbuf_is_contiguous(const struct rte_mbuf *m)
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> + * Chain an mbuf to another, thereby creating a segmented packet.
>>> + *
>>> + * @param head the head of the mbuf chain (the first packet)
>>> + * @param tail the mbuf to put last in the chain
>>> + */
>>> +static inline void rte_pktmbuf_chain(struct rte_mbuf *head, struct rte_mbuf *tail)
>>> +{
>>> + struct rte_mbuf *cur_tail;
>>> +
>>
>> Here, we could check if the pkt_len of tail mbuf is 0. If
>> it's the case, we can just free it and return. It would avoid
>> to have an empty segment inside the mbuf chain, which can be
>> annoying.
>>
>> if (unlikely(rte_pktmbuf_pkt_len(tail) == 0)) {
>> rte_pktmbuf_free(tail);
>> return;
>> }
>
> Wonder why do we need to do that?
> Probably head mbuf is out of space and want to expand it using pktmbuf_chain()?
> So in that case seems logical:
> 1) allocate new mbuf (it's pkt_len will be 0)
> b) call pktmbuf_chain()
By experience, having empty segments in the middle of a mbuf
chain is problematic (functions getting ptr at offsets, some pmds
or hardware may behave badly), I wanted to avoid that risk.
Now, the use-case you described is legitimate. Another option would
be to have another function pktmbuf_append_new(m) that returns a new
mbuf that is already chained to the other.
But I'm also fine with removing the test, it's maybe simpler.
Regards,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-07 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-31 12:41 Simon Kagstrom
2015-09-07 7:32 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-09-07 9:13 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-09-07 9:35 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2015-09-07 10:40 ` Simon Kågström
2015-09-07 11:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Simon Kagstrom
2015-09-07 12:32 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-09-07 12:41 ` Simon Kågström
2015-09-07 23:21 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-09-08 10:40 ` Simon Kågström
2015-09-09 8:22 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-09-07 12:50 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Simon Kagstrom
2015-10-13 12:50 ` Simon Kagstrom
2015-10-13 13:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-10-13 13:11 ` Olivier MATZ
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=55ED5A6A.1000803@6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com \
--cc=simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net \
/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).