DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Hanoch Haim (hhaim)" <hhaim@cisco.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Itay Marom \(imarom\)" <imarom@cisco.com>,
	"Ido Barnea \(ibarnea\)" <ibarnea@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf: optimize rte_mbuf_refcnt_update
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:28:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d8a8e02397b4a01940064eaa1ceb581@XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160113114820.GB7216@bricha3-MOBL3>

Hi Bruce. 
This is exactly what was possible before the patch and does *not* work after this patch. 
I think it is more related to the semantic of the API. My understanding of the API was that I could allocate a share mbuf (ref=1) and then attach it from many concurrent threads (as each thread attach opt inc in 1 and driver reduces, atomic by 1)
After the patch there is a need to make the ref of the share mbuf to be 2 (why?) and free it twice at the end( ?), this makes it cumbersome to use it and for sure there is a need to describe this semantic change.

However, this change is good for the common case, and I think it is better to keep it.
The options I see are:
1) Document the current behavior 
2) Create two sets of API with two types of semantic 

thanks,
Hanoh

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 1:48 PM
To: Hanoch Haim (hhaim)
Cc: Olivier MATZ; dev@dpdk.org; Ido Barnea (ibarnea); Itay Marom (imarom)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf: optimize rte_mbuf_refcnt_update

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 11:11:24AM +0000, Hanoch Haim (hhaim) wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
> Thank you for the fast response and it would be great to open a discussion on that.
> In general our project can leverage your optimization and I think it is great (we should have thought about it) . We can use it using the workaround I described.
> However, for me it  seems odd that  rte_pktmbuf_attach () that does not *change* anything in m_const, except of the *atomic* ref counter does not work in parallel.
> The example I gave is a classic use case of rte_pktmbuf_attach  (multicast ) and I don't see why it wouldn't work after your optimization. 
> 
> Do you have a pointer to the documentation that state that that you can't call the atomic ref counter from more than one thread?
> 
Hi,

actually, the issue is not that you can't work with the reference counter field from multiple threads, or that you can't use an mbuf from multiple threads, it's that if you are working with the same mbuf in multiple threads you have multiple references to the mbuf and your application must increase the reference counter appropriately. For example, if thread A is going to pass an mbuf to thread B and keep using it itself, you must increment the reference counter in thread A before enqueuing it to B.

Regards,
/Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-13 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-27  9:39 Hanoch Haim (hhaim)
2016-01-04 13:53 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-01-04 14:43   ` Hanoch Haim (hhaim)
2016-01-05 10:57     ` Olivier MATZ
2016-01-05 11:11       ` Hanoch Haim (hhaim)
2016-01-05 12:12         ` Olivier MATZ
2016-01-13 11:48         ` Bruce Richardson
2016-01-13 16:28           ` Hanoch Haim (hhaim) [this message]
2016-01-13 16:40             ` Bruce Richardson
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-06-01  9:32 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: optimize first reference increment in rte_pktmbuf_attach Olivier Matz
2015-06-08 14:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf: optimize rte_mbuf_refcnt_update Olivier Matz
2015-06-09 12:57   ` Bruce Richardson
2015-06-12 14:10     ` 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=6d8a8e02397b4a01940064eaa1ceb581@XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com \
    --to=hhaim@cisco.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ibarnea@cisco.com \
    --cc=imarom@cisco.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).