[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] mempool: allow for user-owned mempool caches

[Lazaros Koromilas]

Hi Olivier, thanks for fixing those, just one comment below

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz at 6wind.com> wrote:
> From: Lazaros Koromilas <l at nofutznetworks.com>
>
> The mempool cache is only available to EAL threads as a per-lcore
> resource. Change this so that the user can create and provide their own
> cache on mempool get and put operations. This works with non-EAL threads
> too. This commit introduces the new API calls:
>
>     rte_mempool_cache_create(size, socket_id)
>     rte_mempool_cache_free(cache)
>     rte_mempool_cache_flush(cache, mp)
>     rte_mempool_default_cache(mp, lcore_id)
>
> Changes the API calls:
>
>     rte_mempool_generic_put(mp, obj_table, n, cache, flags)
>     rte_mempool_generic_get(mp, obj_table, n, cache, flags)
>
> The cache-oblivious API calls use the per-lcore default local cache.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lazaros Koromilas <l at nofutznetworks.com>
> Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz at 6wind.com>
> ---
>  app/test/test_mempool.c                    |  75 +++++++++----
>  app/test/test_mempool_perf.c               |  70 ++++++++++---
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c           |  66 +++++++++++-
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h           | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_version.map |   4 +
>  5 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_mempool.c b/app/test/test_mempool.c
> index 55c2cbc..5b3c754 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_mempool.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_mempool.c
> @@ -75,10 +75,18 @@
>  #define MAX_KEEP 16
>  #define MEMPOOL_SIZE ((rte_lcore_count()*(MAX_KEEP+RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE))-1)
>
> -#define RET_ERR() do {                                                 \
> +#define LOG_ERR() do {                                                 \
>                 printf("test failed at %s():%d\n", __func__, __LINE__); \
> +       } while (0)
> +#define RET_ERR() do {                                                 \
> +               LOG_ERR();                                              \
>                 return -1;                                              \
>         } while (0)
> +#define GOTO_ERR(err, label) do {                                      \
> +               LOG_ERR();                                              \
> +               ret = err;                                              \
> +               goto label;                                             \
> +       } while (0)

Here, GOTO_ERR still assumes a variable named ret in the function and
has the value as an argument while RET_ERR always returns -1.  I'd
changed it to use -1:

#define GOTO_ERR(retvar, label) do { LOG_ERR(); retvar = -1; goto
label; } while (0)

Should I do it like that and also quickly add the documentation in a v5?

Thanks,
Lazaros.