From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D4F45A7A for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2024 14:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A68B4027E; Tue, 1 Oct 2024 14:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oa1-f45.google.com (mail-oa1-f45.google.com [209.85.160.45]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 619A64027C for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2024 14:25:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oa1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-2876ef56d8bso331953fac.3 for ; Tue, 01 Oct 2024 05:25:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1727785557; x=1728390357; darn=dpdk.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=R1q3xb6Ri38tfpb+S+USobx8VHW32cvjdCE/kwEr1Vc=; b=dGNwCvPg61Ou35+R2QEZUPWYE13Kx67++FSHlxGOrOdIAtutUXNPGv6UoPWJRvqDyh xPDxcrK7m2TI8uQRYGkpunBePUmhdCTrwgmfMD9dO0BGtV8rqA2gUt+uR/UUHvbdN6cN zs0p2QxJBX0bHR9Qsu0cK8KuSM6FiUCYQldV9NFa5rNfotSz0+2a0UJCn3n1h5WsvtDw J8c/AdmJ3rSsgsWy/f7FLpyxo4eLOVxMZ/jzsz/Y217iWP4E0ol74vBJeQ9WPMLNG69t JNTI8kkmtfN2G1VmxpWBxjME+Zg3gFgTVvBZWiEzJzbK70N2Xbp6SGcdr7IJj2uqpaT4 G04A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727785557; x=1728390357; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=R1q3xb6Ri38tfpb+S+USobx8VHW32cvjdCE/kwEr1Vc=; b=peTCwthazlSvTQKeaqPe5dFQEsWXDTRXq+ah5MU6JWFM5zzOSQarmOzh3ZeWhcwT7x w55E8og4v0B+jY8Lpb9J9Ft+OxdfnGnDObdBppqqhtL1VP2M9G74VGqNKza0FoeBOE7y Q9Wh49OmHgUCEV80nASG7KYKL5AVY90TgvLSoRI3rYFmjqHYRK2OPWnm80/sX//jnSJw J5cX7m9+6YrV/d+3ZztrPRHYM5mRLEmS/hEhESnq2CCLlhXGxl8Dd0QVqoi7PiJYvhAH WRowZN4brCn053je6InZrQBdp2ZoBDzbW7zcRqZEir8E3oIGCPVv6fd09tOPlsqR1aJG zqqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz4F7Y0UAbi1+nLn3zzoc0hu0q2fVsKNaz0SBTa2w39FUYDBgkX YPu1mmkk8YJZV77zmN7j9ECVf41qAQXBz8p0asgWm7aDN2zT22vg80OxYUEhDe7ZfKSWJ8Dtbik gm/aml68EYdotBMrXVdpGU3m/LTtAwMRF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE+Q4AoRKv8RwHiRio+evq+vodEsPUQob3/0fPL5LLhyxax809l/G+RubZUrIHLf1yLmYEiSlh5It7/jqIjfxA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:b020:b0:270:1dab:64a9 with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-28710a59282mr9147610fac.14.1727785557369; Tue, 01 Oct 2024 05:25:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Alan Beadle Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 08:25:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: DPDK Memory Management Help To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Hi everyone, I'm working with DPDK and could use some advice about memory management of the DPDK heap. I need to prevent DPDK from freeing the rte_mbuf buffers once the corresponding packets have been sent with rte_eth_tx_burst(). My application has local readers as well, and so I want to keep that data around for them to read via shared memory. I would prefer to rely on explicit calls to free any of these buffers. I can find plenty of sources about rte_eth_tx_burst() freeing messages once they are sent, but cannot find a way to override this behavior, or any mention of an alternate call to send without freeing. This would let me avoid copying the data into a separate buffer just for local readers and to let them read from the same buffers that DPDK already requires., leading to a significant performance gain (less memcpy). This seems like something that should be possible *without* modifying DPDK, but I haven't figured out how yet. I know that I would need to take care that the buffers are not freed prior to sending. Thanks for any advice, -Alan