[PATCH] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[PATCH] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Gage Eads]

Commit 4b5062755aa7 ("mempool: allow user-owned cache") added the
capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library by checking
rte_lcore_id() before accessing the per-lcore cache. This commit
removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used
safely by non-EAL threads.

Also, fix a typo.

Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
---
 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
  *
  * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
  * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
- * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
- * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
- * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
- * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
- * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
+ * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
  */
 
 #include <stdio.h>
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH v2] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Gage Eads]

Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the capability
for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit removes the note
indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely by non-EAL threads.

Also, fix a typo.

Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
---
v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of 4b5062755

 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
  *
  * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
  * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
- * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
- * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
- * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
- * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
- * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
+ * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
  */
 
 #include <stdio.h>
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Gage Eads]

Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely
by non-EAL threads.

Also, fix a typo.

Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
---
v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of 4b5062755
v3: Fix checkpatch error

 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
  *
  * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
  * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
- * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
- * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
- * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
- * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
- * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
+ * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
  */
 
 #include <stdio.h>
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Gage,

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:20:58 -0500, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com> wrote:
> Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
> capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
> removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely
> by non-EAL threads.
> 
> Also, fix a typo.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> ---
> v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of 4b5062755
> v3: Fix checkpatch error
> 
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> @@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
>   *
>   * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
>   * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
> - * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
> - * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
> - * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
> - * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
> - * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
> + * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
>   */
>  
>  #include <stdio.h>

I agree the comment is not correct today. But I think we should
still highlight that usual functions [ex: rte_mempool_get(),
rte_mempool_put()] won't work when called on a non-EAL thread.

Maybe it could be reworded in that way:

"""
Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must not be
interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool (because it uses
a ring which is not preemptible). Also, usual mempool functions like
rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() are designed to be called from an
EAL thread due to the internal per-lcore cache. When using a mempool
from a non-EAL thread, a user cache has to be provided to
rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put().
"""

What do you think?

Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Eads, Gage]

>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
>  Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 9:05 AM
>  To: Eads, Gage <gage.eads@intel.com>
>  Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>  Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header
>  
>  Hi Gage,
>  
>  On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:20:58 -0500, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
>  wrote:
>  > Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
>  > capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
>  > removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used
>  > safely by non-EAL threads.
>  >
>  > Also, fix a typo.
>  >
>  > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
>  > ---
>  > v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of
>  > 4b5062755
>  > v3: Fix checkpatch error
>  >
>  >  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
>  >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
>  >
>  > diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
>  > b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
>  > index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
>  > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
>  > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
>  > @@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
>  >   *
>  >   * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
>  >   * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
>  > - * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
>  > - * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
>  > - * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
>  > - * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
>  > - * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
>  > + * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
>  >   */
>  >
>  >  #include <stdio.h>
>  
>  I agree the comment is not correct today. But I think we should still highlight
>  that usual functions [ex: rte_mempool_get(), rte_mempool_put()] won't work
>  when called on a non-EAL thread.

My understanding is that non-EAL threads can call those functions, but their performance will suffer since they go directly to the underlying ring. Is that correct?

>  
>  Maybe it could be reworded in that way:
>  
>  """
>  Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must not be
>  interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool (because it uses a ring
>  which is not preemptible). Also, usual mempool functions like
>  rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() are designed to be called from an
>  EAL thread due to the internal per-lcore cache. When using a mempool from a
>  non-EAL thread, a user cache has to be provided to
>  rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put().
>  """
>  
>  What do you think?

Agreed, this looks better. If indeed non-EAL threads can call rte_mempool_get() and _put(), perhaps the last sentence can be reworked like so?

Due to the lack of caching, rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() performance
will suffer when called by non-EAL threads. Instead, non-EAL threads should call
rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put() with a user cache
created with rte_mempool_cache_create().

>  
>  Thanks,
>  Olivier

Re: [PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Gage,

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:30:49 +0000, "Eads, Gage" <gage.eads@intel.com> wrote:
> >  -----Original Message-----
> >  From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> >  Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 9:05 AM
> >  To: Eads, Gage <gage.eads@intel.com>
> >  Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> >  Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mempool: remove non-EAL thread note from header
> >  
> >  Hi Gage,
> >  
> >  On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:20:58 -0500, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> >  wrote:  
> >  > Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
> >  > capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
> >  > removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used
> >  > safely by non-EAL threads.
> >  >
> >  > Also, fix a typo.
> >  >
> >  > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> >  > ---
> >  > v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of
> >  > 4b5062755
> >  > v3: Fix checkpatch error
> >  >
> >  >  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +-----
> >  >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >  >
> >  > diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> >  > b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> >  > index 991feaa..b1186fd 100644
> >  > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> >  > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> >  > @@ -53,11 +53,7 @@
> >  >   *
> >  >   * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
> >  >   * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
> >  > - * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
> >  > - * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
> >  > - * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
> >  > - * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
> >  > - * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
> >  > + * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptible).
> >  >   */
> >  >
> >  >  #include <stdio.h>  
> >  
> >  I agree the comment is not correct today. But I think we should still highlight
> >  that usual functions [ex: rte_mempool_get(), rte_mempool_put()] won't work
> >  when called on a non-EAL thread.  
> 
> My understanding is that non-EAL threads can call those functions, but their performance will suffer since they go directly to the underlying ring. Is that correct?

Yes, that's more correct than what I wrote :)


> 
> >  
> >  Maybe it could be reworded in that way:
> >  
> >  """
> >  Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must not be
> >  interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool (because it uses a ring
> >  which is not preemptible). Also, usual mempool functions like
> >  rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() are designed to be called from an
> >  EAL thread due to the internal per-lcore cache. When using a mempool from a
> >  non-EAL thread, a user cache has to be provided to
> >  rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put().
> >  """
> >  
> >  What do you think?  
> 
> Agreed, this looks better. If indeed non-EAL threads can call rte_mempool_get() and _put(), perhaps the last sentence can be reworked like so?
> 
> Due to the lack of caching, rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() performance
> will suffer when called by non-EAL threads. Instead, non-EAL threads should call
> rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put() with a user cache
> created with rte_mempool_cache_create().

Looks good, thanks!

Olivier


> 
> >  
> >  Thanks,
> >  Olivier  

[PATCH v4] mempool: update non-EAL thread note in the header

[Gage Eads]

Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely
by non-EAL threads, and replaces it with a more up-to-date note.

Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
---
v2: Changed commit message to referenced commit 30e63998 instead of 4b5062755
v3: Fix checkpatch error
v4: Rework note to highlight non-EAL thread differences

 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 16 +++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index 991feaa..931faf3 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -51,13 +51,15 @@
  * meta-data in the object data and retrieve them when allocating a
  * new object.
  *
- * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptable. A lcore must
- * not be interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool
- * (because it uses a ring which is not preemptable). Also, mempool
- * functions must not be used outside the DPDK environment: for
- * example, in linuxapp environment, a thread that is not created by
- * the EAL must not use mempools. This is due to the per-lcore cache
- * that won't work as rte_lcore_id() will not return a correct value.
+ * Note: the mempool implementation is not preemptible. An lcore must not be
+ * interrupted by another task that uses the same mempool (because it uses a
+ * ring which is not preemptible). Also, usual mempool functions like
+ * rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() are designed to be called from an EAL
+ * thread due to the internal per-lcore cache. Due to the lack of caching,
+ * rte_mempool_get() or rte_mempool_put() performance will suffer when called
+ * by non-EAL threads. Instead, non-EAL threads should call
+ * rte_mempool_generic_get() or rte_mempool_generic_put() with a user cache
+ * created with rte_mempool_cache_create().
  */
 
 #include <stdio.h>
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH v4] mempool: update non-EAL thread note in the header

[Olivier Matz]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:02:00 -0500, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com> wrote:
> Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
> capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
> removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely
> by non-EAL threads, and replaces it with a more up-to-date note.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>

Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>

Re: [PATCH v4] mempool: update non-EAL thread note in the header

[Thomas Monjalon]

2017-03-31 15:51, Olivier Matz:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:02:00 -0500, Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com> wrote:
> > Commit 30e6399892276 ("mempool: support non-EAL thread") added the
> > capability for non-EAL threads to use the mempool library. This commit
> > removes the note indicating that the mempool library cannot be used safely
> > by non-EAL threads, and replaces it with a more up-to-date note.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>

Applied, thanks