On Fri, 31 May 2019 20:03:33 +0300 Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Probably it's not good example for others how it should be used, not > a big problem to move it to separate pools.., even don't remember why > I decided to use shared pool, there was some more reasons... need > search in history. Using a shared pool is makes it a lot harder to solve the issue I'm currently working on. That is handling/waiting for in-flight frames to complete, before removing the mem ID from the (r)hashtable lookup. I have working code, that basically remove page_pool_destroy() from public API, and instead lets xdp_rxq_info_unreg() call it when in-flight count reach zero (and delay fully removing the mem ID). -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
|