> Hi Lorenzo,
Hi Ilias,
thx for the review.
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 08:04:07PM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
[...]
> > +void xdp_return_frame_bulk(struct xdp_frame *xdpf,
> > + struct xdp_frame_bulk *bq)
> > +{
> > + struct xdp_mem_info *mem = &xdpf->mem;
> > + struct xdp_mem_allocator *xa, *nxa;
> > +
> > + if (mem->type != MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL) {
> > + __xdp_return(xdpf->data, &xdpf->mem, false);
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > +
> > + xa = bq->xa;
> > + if (unlikely(!xa || mem->id != xa->mem.id)) {
>
> Why is this marked as unlikely? The driver passes it as NULL. Should unlikely be
> checked on both xa and the comparison?
xa is NULL only for the first xdp_frame in the burst while it is set for
subsequent ones. Do you think it is better to remove it?
>
> > + nxa = rhashtable_lookup(mem_id_ht, &mem->id, mem_id_rht_params);
>
> Is there a chance nxa can be NULL?
I do not think so since the page_pool is not destroyed while there are
in-flight pages, right?
Regards,
Lorenzo
>
> > + if (unlikely(!xa)) {
>
> Same here, driver passes it as NULL
>
> > + bq->count = 0;
> > + bq->xa = nxa;
> > + xa = nxa;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (mem->id != xa->mem.id || bq->count == XDP_BULK_QUEUE_SIZE)
> > + xdp_flush_frame_bulk(bq);
> > +
> > + bq->q[bq->count++] = xdpf->data;
> > + if (mem->id != xa->mem.id)
> > + bq->xa = nxa;
> > +
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xdp_return_frame_bulk);
> > +
> > void xdp_return_buff(struct xdp_buff *xdp)
> > {
> > __xdp_return(xdp->data, &xdp->rxq->mem, true);
> > --
> > 2.26.2
> >
>
> Cheers
> /Ilias
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
