| Message ID | 20241015145350.4077765-14-aleksander.lobakin@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | idpf: XDP chapter III: core XDP changes (+libeth_xdp) | expand |
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 04:53:45PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > When you register an XSk pool as XDP Rxq info memory model, you then > need to manually attach it after the registration. > Let the user combine both actions into one by just passing a pointer > to the pool directly to xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(), which will take > care of calling xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(). This looks similar to how a > &page_pool gets registered and reduce repeating driver code. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com> Makes sense, but why not address callsites in drivers while at it? Otherwise in case this would be merged this would be called twice. Not a big deal though. Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> > --- > net/core/xdp.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/net/core/xdp.c b/net/core/xdp.c > index 9dc103a09b5c..371c26c203b2 100644 > --- a/net/core/xdp.c > +++ b/net/core/xdp.c > @@ -358,6 +358,9 @@ int xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(struct xdp_rxq_info *xdp_rxq, > if (IS_ERR(xdp_alloc)) > return PTR_ERR(xdp_alloc); > > + if (type == MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL && allocator) > + xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(allocator, xdp_rxq); > + > if (trace_mem_connect_enabled() && xdp_alloc) > trace_mem_connect(xdp_alloc, xdp_rxq); > return 0; > -- > 2.46.2 >
From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 14:49:51 +0200 > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 04:53:45PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote: >> When you register an XSk pool as XDP Rxq info memory model, you then >> need to manually attach it after the registration. >> Let the user combine both actions into one by just passing a pointer >> to the pool directly to xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(), which will take >> care of calling xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(). This looks similar to how a >> &page_pool gets registered and reduce repeating driver code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com> > > Makes sense, but why not address callsites in drivers while at it? > Otherwise in case this would be merged this would be called twice. Not a > big deal though. You said yourself that this series is big enough already :D This won't be called twice as here I call it only when `allocator != NULL`, but all the callsites pass NULL when they want to register an XSk pool. It's not NULL only in case of Page Pool. > > Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> Thanks, Olek
diff --git a/net/core/xdp.c b/net/core/xdp.c index 9dc103a09b5c..371c26c203b2 100644 --- a/net/core/xdp.c +++ b/net/core/xdp.c @@ -358,6 +358,9 @@ int xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(struct xdp_rxq_info *xdp_rxq, if (IS_ERR(xdp_alloc)) return PTR_ERR(xdp_alloc); + if (type == MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL && allocator) + xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(allocator, xdp_rxq); + if (trace_mem_connect_enabled() && xdp_alloc) trace_mem_connect(xdp_alloc, xdp_rxq); return 0;
When you register an XSk pool as XDP Rxq info memory model, you then need to manually attach it after the registration. Let the user combine both actions into one by just passing a pointer to the pool directly to xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(), which will take care of calling xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(). This looks similar to how a &page_pool gets registered and reduce repeating driver code. Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com> --- net/core/xdp.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)