Question: Why doesn’t rte_ring use double-mapped VMA to eliminate wraparound logic?

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2025 16:57:37 +0000
Rami Neiman <rami.neiman at solace.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have a design question regarding rte_ring that I didn’t find a historical rationale for in the archives.
> Most modern high-perf ring buffers (e.g. some NIC drivers, some DB queue implementations, etc.) eliminate wrap-around branches by taking the ring’s element array and mapping two consecutive VA ranges to the same physical backing pages.
> i.e. you allocate N elements, commit enough pages to cover N, then call mmap (or equivalent) again immediately following it, pointing to the same physical pages. So from the CPU’s POV the element array is logically [0 .. N*2) but physically it’s the same backing. Therefore a batch read/write can always be done as a single contiguous memcpy/CLD/STOS without conditionals, even if (head+bulk) exceeds N.
> Pseudo illustration:
> 
> [phys buffer of N slots]
> VA: [0 .. N) -> phys
> VA: [N .. 2N) -> same phys
> 
> 
> For multi-element enqueue/dequeue it eliminates the “if wrap → split” case entirely — you can always memcpy in one contiguous op.
> Question:
> Is there an explicit reason DPDK doesn’t use this technique for rte_ring?
> e.g.

Manipulating process mapping in user space is often non-portable, it is possible on Linux to use mmap
to do this but would require deep changes to the API.