Thanks Mark for your review, some comment inline. -Antonio
> -----Original Message----- > From: Kavanagh, Mark B > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 3:46 PM > To: Fischetti, Antonio <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v5 0/6] netdev-dpdk: Fix management of pre- > existing mempools. > > > > >From: [email protected] > >[mailto:[email protected]] > >On Behalf Of [email protected] > >Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 5:01 PM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v5 0/6] netdev-dpdk: Fix management of pre-existing > >mempools. > > > >List of versions: > > - v5: manage new MTU value when a pre-existing mempool is returned. > > - v4: fix NUMA awareness usecase > > - v3: avoid deletion of pre-existing mempools > > - v2: rework to accomodate code changes for dpdk ports too > > - v1: 1st implementation. > > > >Fischetti, Antonio (6): > > netdev-dpdk: fix management of pre-existing mempools. > > netdev-dpdk: Fix mempool names to reflect socket id. > > netdev-dpdk: skip init for existing mempools. > > netdev-dpdk: assert mempool names. > > netdev-dpdk: Reword mp_size as n_mbufs. > > netdev-dpdk: Rename dpdk_mp_put as dpdk_mp_free. > > Hi Antonio, > > Some general comments on this patchset: > - patches 1 and 3 of the series should be squashed into one. [Antonio] The fixes are for two different issues: - Issue #1: detecting when previous mempools must be released - Issue #2: mempool name generation for NUMA-awareness test case The 1st issue came earlier from a PVP test case and while its fix was being tested, the 2nd issue for the NUMA-awareness usecase came later on. I kept these two fixes into two separate patches because the vHost Zero-copy development was blocked by the issue #1, so keeping two independent patches would speed up upstreaming patch #1 - and unblocking vHost Zero-copy development. > - patches 3-6 are purely cosmetic, and do not contribute to fixing the mempool > reconfiguration mechanism; [Antonio] Agree, the name of the series says "Fix management.." but the real 'fixes' are in patches #1 and #2. > as such, they should be part of a separate patchset. > - initial testing has been successful; I'll send on final results as soon as > they are available. > > Thanks, > Mark > > > > > > lib/netdev-dpdk.c | 88 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > >- > > 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) > > > >-- > >2.4.11 > > > >_______________________________________________ > >dev mailing list > >[email protected] > >https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
