From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB0AEA09E7;
	Tue,  8 Dec 2020 08:29:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F5972DE;
	Tue,  8 Dec 2020 08:29:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-lf1-f41.google.com (mail-lf1-f41.google.com
 [209.85.167.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B190198
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  8 Dec 2020 08:29:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-lf1-f41.google.com with SMTP id b4so14105301lfo.6
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 23:29:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=1QvphRaNdfeCqCUYZPcyO1SnRJaWB4oHK2wcdVISnLg=;
 b=mURZWzaGEOdGNbjlw741TSYQ9OYwQPdCuECSq6QWfO3p049mpmydHK0vASs53Pj4SL
 hqWvqokZMAHusxRtpMAeFdtFMt8nPvm03abwnGqP7qmQMKaSciV+388PLD38Yl+v8hQQ
 TDFmGVnhKEn7CKHiKuu1tqvbu6LWw2AtosuSK3+SzxItYt4/fVBAJs8t/oSvYojqjeaf
 E+3QCYS9iDAPYINbnkbKjOnObVB6pxTzzwzlpY50zFpD8UAO16nR1GkJ6ZSiPJQ6JUVE
 lZrYQdCXUFEGZkkYAimOshjmMM2QzWFhWEUtxiQ5ybUVJpn7wox2g57kXINjLTtXjP7/
 75Bg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=1QvphRaNdfeCqCUYZPcyO1SnRJaWB4oHK2wcdVISnLg=;
 b=KyMJuPgRey4t+dD+ucVg7P/G4xU5rm0+qYK02WIyk8FJeGERGJLMXCdH1KDVT4axkT
 sGshCkWuDnzq9ghDFx+TXW2zhZ6YLXCcaf9vTkrBlvyM/jXV/RzQsM6IFYbZmG1OcE/k
 2+3AexjNXAwXCWsTvMDoWPjqLdm+xMVAqE1ocTn2sYq4ZJuHmhXkOGcsHvuH14yUFzLx
 +ObGhTWlNE122z/oQ+ONl9yU4t49SnCyoVS0QKrOwMSxWMjeOAcPlCdUFAvqphtnWXx8
 bairN3xrdgbCrXSPpjlxS+LY9C7m2JEhhvdCB1XqBXthQBbx496FjbOsIyBjAgFZwPG9
 qf0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tbsWv1VPDa5h5+LaCSAKUc3uk3nDuFqiMJI1Ul6h8e3oEvBlq
 R7m2pis5nvPeLUWgDy7oor4obQJiVcyfWwm4EdkVIetGAzI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwWwBW4UD/ZsN9OFbWAaJKIksyyQ+Nqo9VEPUCVGQOBWnGrdmEGtsyMDX0Z0Eg2sEkajXfyrapEmmIvnLZ+58k=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:10:: with SMTP id 16mr2861776lfa.334.1607412590060;
 Mon, 07 Dec 2020 23:29:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Kamaraj P <pkamaraj@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:59:37 +0530
Message-ID: <CAG8PAarbr5zE1kwT10us=3KkV-z0tFti-+jxvPQabBGFP0FJvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: Nageswara Rao Penumarthy <npenumar@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-dev] rte_pktmbuf_pool_create returns EINVAL
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hello All,

We are using DDPDK 19.11 and when we call *rte_pktmbuf_pool_create() *API
allocate memory,
we could see the EINVAL ( EINVAL - cache size provided is too large, or
priv_size is not aligned ) return from that above API.
We are seeing the issue only when we pass the Priv_size value of 64 bytes
which is aligned to RTE_MBUF_PRIV_ALIGN(8 bytes).

Here is our snippet of our code base:
#define MBUF_CACHE_SIZE   *512 *
#define MBUF_PRIV_SIZE        *64*
#define FRAME_LEN             *9216*
#define NO_OF_MBUF
*52736 *

/*define in rte_config.h */
#define RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM 128

pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(name, num_mbufs,
                                   MBUF_CACHE_SIZE, MBUF_PRIV_SIZE,
                                   frame_len + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM,
                                   rte_socket_id());

The above check was failed with EINVAL

Could you please suggest if there is any known issue or limitation w.r.t
19.11

Thanks,
Kamaraj