From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 24/70] mempool: add support for the new
 allocation methods
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 17:43:01 +0300
Message-ID: <e2d417ee-df63-b193-0ccf-204dfc807bfb@solarflare.com>
References: <cover.1523448978.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <17e7d16a54e2d3383a3857733589b91e2c691f66.1523448978.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, <keith.wiles@intel.com>,
 <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>, <andras.kovacs@ericsson.com>,
 <laszlo.vadkeri@ericsson.com>, <benjamin.walker@intel.com>,
 <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, <kuralamudhan.ramakrishnan@intel.com>,
 <louise.m.daly@intel.com>, <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>,
 <yskoh@mellanox.com>, <pepperjo@japf.ch>, <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
 <gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com
 [148.163.129.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9253C1BB1C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 16:43:19 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <17e7d16a54e2d3383a3857733589b91e2c691f66.1523448978.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 04/11/2018 03:29 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
> If a user has specified that the zone should have contiguous memory,
> use the new _contig allocation API's instead of normal ones.

Just one minor nit..
As I understand _contig above is an artefact of the previous approach
with dedicated function for contiguous allocation. If so, description
should be updated to avoid confusion.

> Otherwise, account for the fact that unless we're in IOVA_AS_VA
> mode, we cannot guarantee that the pages would be physically
> contiguous, so we calculate the memzone size and alignments as if
> we were getting the smallest page size available.
>
> However, for the non-IOVA contiguous case, existing mempool size
> calculation function doesn't give us expected results, because it
> will return memzone sizes aligned to page size (e.g. a 1MB mempool
> may use an entire 1GB page), therefore in cases where we weren't
> specifically asked to reserve non-contiguous memory, first try
> reserving a memzone as IOVA-contiguous, and if that fails, then
> try reserving with page-aligned size/alignment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>
> Tested-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> Tested-by: Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan <gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>   lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 148 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>   1 file changed, 127 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)