From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39D6B2A7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:04:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
 by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Jun 2014 16:59:44 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,541,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="533629469"
Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159])
 by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Jun 2014 17:05:07 -0700
Received: from irsmsx151.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.59) by
 IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.123.3; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:05:07 +0100
Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.31]) by
 IRSMSX151.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.192.59]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003;
 Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:05:07 +0100
From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH DRAFT 1/2] ethdev: add buffered single
 pkt TX function to API
Thread-Index: AQHPj/xB+AyOqWM0lEWZjoOLvdUXWJuA0OyAgAAgkyA=
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 00:05:06 +0000
Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B02CEE35C9@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1403649136-23551-1-git-send-email-bruce.richardson@intel.com>
 <1403649136-23551-2-git-send-email-bruce.richardson@intel.com>
 <20140624160545.136ad9e4@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140624160545.136ad9e4@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH DRAFT 1/2] ethdev: add buffered single
 pkt TX function to API
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 00:04:51 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:06 PM
> To: Richardson, Bruce
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH DRAFT 1/2] ethdev: add buffered single=
 pkt
> TX function to API
>=20
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 23:32:15 +0100
> Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
>=20
> >
> > +static void
> > +free_unsent_pkts(struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t unsent,
> > +		void *userdata __rte_unused)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned i;
> > +	for (i =3D 0; i < unsent; i++)
> > +		rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
> > +}
> > +
>=20
> This should be moved into mbuf layer, and there it could be
> optimized to do a rte_mempool_mp_put_bulk. This would speed
> up operations becuase it would mean a single ring operation
> per set rather per mbuf segment.
>=20
> Of course, the optimization would have to handle the refcnt
> issues.

I'm not sure how we can improve this by bringing it into the mbuf layer. As=
 well as handling of refcounts, we also have no guarantee than each mbuf qu=
eued up for a particular port comes from the same mempool.
Can you please clarify how you think this might be better done?