Re: [dpdk-users] mbuf free cnt not decreasing

["Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>]

>Javier,
>That was just our guess, you might have the leak somewhere else...
>
>Andriy
>
>On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Javier Coleto Fernández
><javicoleto44@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is exactly what I'm doing at the moment, but the free count (both the
>> rte_mempool_free_count() and rte_ring_free_count()) keeps increasing
>> nonetheless.

Check to make sure you are not increasing the reference count in the mbuf, these two are the most common places to lose packets. Also check your loops to make sure you are not breaking out of the packet processing loops too soon and skipping some packets. In one case I have seen someone converted a while loop into a for loop and forgot to remove the i++ some place in the body of the code. Try adding counter on your code to see if you are missing processing or freeing the packets.

I would not expect the DPDK code to be the problem, so focus on your code is all I can tell you.

>>
>> Regards,
>> Javier
>>
>> 2016-04-18 17:57 GMT+02:00 Andriy Berestovskyy <aber@semihalf.com>:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Javier Coleto Fernández
>>> <javicoleto44@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Basing on what you say, is that return value supposed to be less than
>>> > 'n' in
>>> > case the ring is filled up or do I have to check the ring size before
>>> > calling rte_eth_tx_burst()?
>>>
>>> You just have to check the return value and free the unsent mbufs.
>>> Here is an example:
>>>
>>> ret = rte_eth_tx_burst(port, queueid, m_table, n);
>>> if (unlikely(ret < n)) {
>>>     do {
>>>         rte_pktmbuf_free(m_table[ret]);
>>>     } while (++ret < n);
>>> }
>


Regards,
Keith