On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 5:18 PM David Wei <dw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2024-04-02 5:20 pm, Mina Almasry wrote: > > @@ -69,20 +106,26 @@ net_iov_binding(const struct net_iov *niov) > > */ > > typedef unsigned long __bitwise netmem_ref; > > > > +static inline bool netmem_is_net_iov(const netmem_ref netmem) > > +{ > > +#if defined(CONFIG_PAGE_POOL) && defined(CONFIG_DMA_SHARED_BUFFER) > > I am guessing you added this to try and speed up the fast path? It's > overly restrictive for us since we do not need dmabuf necessarily. I > spent a bit too much time wondering why things aren't working only to > find this :( My apologies, I'll try to put the changelog somewhere prominent, or notify you when I do something that I think breaks you. Yes, this is a by-product of a discussion with regards to the page_pool benchmark regressions due to adding devmem. There is some background on why this was added and the impact on the bench_page_pool_simple tests in the cover letter. For you, I imagine you want to change this to something like: #if defined(CONFIG_PAGE_POOL) #if defined(CONFIG_DMA_SHARED_BUFFER) || defined(CONFIG_IOURING) or something like that, right? Not sure if this is something I should do here or if something more appropriate to be in the patches you apply on top. I additionally think you may also need to run the page_pool_benchmark_simple tests like I do in the cover letter to see if you're affecting those. -- Thanks, Mina