[dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] add IOVA = VA support in KNI

[Burakov, Anatoly]

On 15-Jul-19 5:54 AM, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote:
>>>>>>> (also, i don't really like the name NO_PAGE_BOUND since in
>>>>>>> memzone API there's a "bounded memzone" allocation API, and this
>>>>>>> flag's name reads like objects would not be bounded by page size,
>>>>>>> not that they won't cross page
>>>>>>> boundary)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No strong opinion for the name. What name you suggest?
>>>>>
>>>>> How about something like MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT?
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>>
>>>> In summary, Change wrt existing patch"
>>>> - Change NO_PAGE_BOUND to MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT
>>>> - Set this flag in  rte_pktmbuf_pool_create () when
>>> rte_eal_has_hugepages() ||
>>>>    rte_malloc_heap_socket_is_external(socket_id))
>>>
>>> If we are to have a special KNI allocation API, would we even need that?
>>
>> Not need this change in rte_pktmbuf_pool_create () if we introduce a new
>> rte_kni_pktmbuf_pool_create () API.
> 
> Ferruh, Olivier, Anatoly,
> 
> Any objection to create new rte_kni_pktmbuf_pool_create () API
> to embedded MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT flag requirement for KNI + IOVA as VA
> 
> 

As long as we all are aware of what that means and agree with that 
consequence (namely, separate codepaths for KNI and other PMD's) then i 
have no specific objections.

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly