From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <peter.feifan.chen@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91EC66789
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:29:56 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id y10so1644363wgg.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:31:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=V2GGBOq5AkMxTcieq+Dp81OxBDuk5s7H7JatTLGsbs4=;
 b=1JYlaKzk1eJaMuQdT9TBK59ldkDTfgzL1I6H2QsYw60tV3ORJaXg4zuUmsYk1r5DPp
 ZrH6n57kSeopAVuaWkY94v7W0t9fVJqoKF4Aak/EqqKQ27ij6XzqoPCJQc0m8N6GFYAK
 A6bwDG+3KE676DvAhABrluk4DVbqxGUk83ErkTJCRYbnDyF74q4lHrU46crMQVf97V9D
 zsnuppnNyRU2MhUF1bHRQAro1ViYh9E5yKzoWHKYZgSIXM22vrYFEZTSzwoTOrku0Bgm
 pypXkHoH1R9LDl8wiE1HCx3thiRu4QZijCgBWPxOvirJoOHCc4/N40IYO74KYcjdVgmU
 m9Rg==
X-Received: by 10.180.37.201 with SMTP id a9mr4554433wik.18.1387488663027;
 Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:31:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.181.200 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:30:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201312191804.31322.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
References: <CAG9qd2pi-Q7LawBymDSsAY3054FUqf7RK0L61oDrsKVY_Q4S0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <201312191804.31322.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
From: Peter Chen <peter.feifan.chen@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:30:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMGYKAfuRdhuydXixJ-ycTQcksRqSKOmFpz8fJGuNZEob04E6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Is rte_mempool library is multi-thread safe ???
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: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:29:56 -0000

does that mean that on the same core, we can't do rte_eth_rx_burst in one
thread (I assume this function allocates from mempool for storing mbufs
everytime it receives a packet), while another thread calls
rte_pktmbuf_alloc from the same mem_pool?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Thomas Monjalon
<thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> 19/12/2013 11:57, ankit kumar :
> > It was working fine but i am not sure that memory allocation &
> > deallocation in rte_mempool library, is multi-thread safe or not.
>
> From http://dpdk.org/doc/api/rte__mempool_8h.html:
>         "the mempool implementation is not preemptable"
> There is more explanations in this email:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2013-August/000402.html
>
> --
> Thomas
>