> > Actually, we started out with that approach, where the packet_mmap > call mapped Tx/Rx descriptor rings and the packet buffer region. We > later moved to this (register umem) approach, because it's more > flexible for user space, not having to use a AF_PACKET specific > allocator (i.e. continue to use regular mallocs, huge pages and such). >
One quick question: Any thoughts on SVM support? Is SVM support going to be so disruptive that we will need to churn a tp_v5? If not then to accommodate future SVM enablement do you think it might make sense to add/stuff a control-info union in the tp4_queue (or umem etc). And then in the future, I think setmemreg (or something else) would need to pass the PASID in addition to the malloc'd addr. Assumption here is that the user-app will bind PID<->PASID before invoking the AF_ZC setup. > Björn Chetan
