[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/af_packet: remove limitation on number of qpairs
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Fri Feb 28 11:08:43 CET 2020
On 2/27/2020 8:00 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Since qpairs is part of the vdev arguments, there is no need to
> limit it to 16. The queue arrays can be dynamically sized based
> on the requested parameters.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org>
> ---
> drivers/net/af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c b/drivers/net/af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c
> index f5806bf42c46..e5e0aa9277a8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/af_packet/rte_eth_af_packet.c
> @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@
> #define DFLT_FRAME_SIZE (1 << 11)
> #define DFLT_FRAME_COUNT (1 << 9)
>
> -#define RTE_PMD_AF_PACKET_MAX_RINGS 16
> -
> struct pkt_rx_queue {
> int sockfd;
>
> @@ -77,8 +75,8 @@ struct pmd_internals {
>
> struct tpacket_req req;
>
> - struct pkt_rx_queue rx_queue[RTE_PMD_AF_PACKET_MAX_RINGS];
> - struct pkt_tx_queue tx_queue[RTE_PMD_AF_PACKET_MAX_RINGS];
> + struct pkt_rx_queue *rx_queue;
> + struct pkt_tx_queue *tx_queue;
> };
>
> static const char *valid_arguments[] = {
> @@ -601,6 +599,18 @@ rte_pmd_init_internals(struct rte_vdev_device *dev,
> if (*internals == NULL)
> return -1;
>
> +
> + (*internals)->rx_queue = rte_calloc_socket("af_packet_rx",
> + nb_queues,
> + sizeof(struct pkt_rx_queue),
> + 0, numa_node);
> + (*internals)->tx_queue = rte_calloc_socket("af_packet_tx",
> + nb_queues,
> + sizeof(struct pkt_tx_queue),
> + 0, numa_node);
Not for this patch but right now all queue initialization done during init based
on max queue PMD can support, we may move allocating and configuring queues in
'eth_rx_queue_setup' & 'eth_tx_queue_setup' based on number of queue application
request, in the future...
> + if (!(*internals)->rx_queue || !(*internals)->tx_queue)
> + return -1;
If only one allocation fails, should we free the other?
> +
> for (q = 0; q < nb_queues; q++) {
> (*internals)->rx_queue[q].map = MAP_FAILED;
> (*internals)->tx_queue[q].map = MAP_FAILED;
> @@ -846,8 +856,7 @@ rte_eth_from_packet(struct rte_vdev_device *dev,
> pair = &kvlist->pairs[k_idx];
> if (strstr(pair->key, ETH_AF_PACKET_NUM_Q_ARG) != NULL) {
> qpairs = atoi(pair->value);
> - if (qpairs < 1 ||
> - qpairs > RTE_PMD_AF_PACKET_MAX_RINGS) {
> + if (qpairs < 1) {
> PMD_LOG(ERR,
> "%s: invalid qpairs value",
> name);
> @@ -1019,6 +1028,8 @@ rte_pmd_af_packet_remove(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
> rte_free(internals->tx_queue[q].rd);
> }
> free(internals->if_name);
> + rte_free(internals->rx_queue);
> + rte_free(internals->tx_queue);
>
> rte_eth_dev_release_port(eth_dev);
>
>
More information about the dev
mailing list