On 12/17/2024 11:27 AM, Mina Almasry wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 2:58 PM Nelson, Shannon <shannon.nelson@xxxxxxx> wrote:
+
+Driver support
+==============
+
+1. The driver must support page_pool. The driver must not do its own recycling
+ on top of page_pool.
+
+2. The driver must support the tcp-data-split ethtool option.
+
+3. The driver must use the page_pool netmem APIs. The netmem APIs are
+ currently 1-to-1 correspond with page APIs. Conversion to netmem should be
+ achievable by switching the page APIs to netmem APIs and tracking memory via
+ netmem_refs in the driver rather than struct page * :
+
+ - page_pool_alloc -> page_pool_alloc_netmem
+ - page_pool_get_dma_addr -> page_pool_get_dma_addr_netmem
+ - page_pool_put_page -> page_pool_put_netmem
+
+ Not all page APIs have netmem equivalents at the moment. If your driver
+ relies on a missing netmem API, feel free to add and propose to netdev@ or
+ reach out to almasrymina@xxxxxxxxxx for help adding the netmem API.
You may want to replace your name with "the maintainers" and let the
MAINTAINERS file keep track of who currently takes care of netmem
things, rather than risk this email getting stale and forgotten.
If it's OK with you, I'll change this to "the maintainers and/or
almasrymina@xxxxxxxxxx".
> > Reasoning is that currently Jakub really has reviewed all the netmem
stuff very closely, and I'm hesitant to practically point to him to
all future netmem questions or issues, especially since I can help
with all the low hanging fruit. I don't currently show up in the
maintainers file, and unless called for there is no entry for netmem
maintenance. Wording the docs like this gives me the chance to help
with some of the low hanging fruit without going so far as to add
myself to maintainers.
If the email does go stale we can always update it and if there
becomes a dedicated entry in MAINTAINERS for netmem we can always
remove this.
Fine with me, thanks for the note.
Will address all the other points, thanks!
--
Thanks,
Mina
Cheers,
sln
