[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] mempool: add non-IO flag
Olivier Matz
olivier.matz at 6wind.com
Fri Oct 15 15:19:28 CEST 2021
Hi Dmitry,
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 02:01:29PM +0300, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote:
> Mempool is a generic allocator that is not necessarily used for device
> IO operations and its memory for DMA. Add MEMPOOL_F_NON_IO flag to mark
> such mempools automatically if their objects are not contiguous
> or IOVA are not available. Components can inspect this flag
> in order to optimize their memory management.
> Discussion: https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-August/216654.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk at nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: Matan Azrad <matan at nvidia.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_mempool.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_11.rst | 3 +
> lib/mempool/rte_mempool.c | 2 +
> lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h | 5 ++
> 4 files changed, 86 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_mempool.c b/app/test/test_mempool.c
> index bc0cc9ed48..15146dd737 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_mempool.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_mempool.c
> @@ -672,6 +672,74 @@ test_mempool_events_safety(void)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int
> +test_mempool_flag_non_io_set_when_no_iova_contig_set(void)
> +{
> + struct rte_mempool *mp;
> + int ret;
> +
> + mp = rte_mempool_create_empty("empty", MEMPOOL_SIZE,
> + MEMPOOL_ELT_SIZE, 0, 0,
> + SOCKET_ID_ANY, MEMPOOL_F_NO_IOVA_CONTIG);
> + RTE_TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mp, "Cannot create mempool: %s",
> + rte_strerror(rte_errno));
> + rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, rte_mbuf_best_mempool_ops(), NULL);
> + ret = rte_mempool_populate_default(mp);
> + RTE_TEST_ASSERT(ret > 0, "Failed to populate mempool: %s",
> + rte_strerror(rte_errno));
> + RTE_TEST_ASSERT(mp->flags & MEMPOOL_F_NON_IO,
> + "NON_IO flag is not set when NO_IOVA_CONTIG is set");
> + rte_mempool_free(mp);
> + return 0;
> +}
One comment that also applies to the previous patch. Using
RTE_TEST_ASSERT_*() is convenient to test a condition, display an error
message and return on error in one operation. But here it can cause a
leak on test failure.
I don't know what is the best approach to solve the issue. Having
equivalent test macros that do "goto fail" instead of "return -1" would
help here. I mean something like:
RTE_TEST_ASSERT_GOTO_*(cond, label, fmt, ...)
What do you think?
More information about the dev
mailing list