On 7/18/23 12:29 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 12:20:59 -0600 David Ahern wrote: >> On 7/18/23 12:15 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 15:06:29 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> netlink feels like a weird API choice for that, in particular it would >>>> be really wrong to somehow bind the lifecycle of a netlink object to a >>>> process. >>> >>> Netlink is the right API, life cycle of objects can be easily tied to >>> a netlink socket. >> >> That is an untuitive connection -- memory references, h/w queues, flow >> steering should be tied to the datapath socket, not a control plane socket. > > There's one RSS context for may datapath sockets. Plus a lot of the > APIs already exist, and it's more of a question of packaging them up > at the user space level. For things which do not have an API, however, > netlink, please. I do not see how 1 RSS context (or more specifically a h/w Rx queue) can be used properly with memory from different processes (or dma-buf references). When the process dies, that memory needs to be flushed from the H/W queues. Queues with interlaced submissions make that more complicated. I guess the devil is in the details; I look forward to the evolution of the patches.
