Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp3673961ybi; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 11:30:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx4FhYHWoqmOg5p8LmsZb18hXER+NOGXAEEPxoX9dTvZQqyk7P0aLRWzL6Sns/OdQi6WmGX X-Received: by 2002:a65:42c6:: with SMTP id l6mr33106893pgp.442.1562092200619; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 11:30:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1562092200; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mv1D9vR9HvJYqgF+RneGWxes9QfquubvlUKy1rq2V6ByNmk8XbdmpSnnbTyI+D+Pxo F/XVLZXm1/6dLJXBY+eWHf7heLPb98wOWFL59WFmo6wS2KPYKL2gDW5Fs0HVVJEJdKeE c1LSxDLeJafKrrq9P4lZN4aezsbBoZ53pWTQouPNIRDdy8fSMEI9JHi8z7vLQUWeNrb6 eS7D4H7btZxB7OrSRdV96xDSP62xvqt4UwB7BLphu2v+PVstAnrTsQOGPvHk5J8S98sU rnMd/VMwhimF24VZU1BtciDVvYSJBNjFbtgYQz6VB6BwgyTq4UT99SEF9jljCsKv4rzs YLLw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=fMBrdMw6jhzjD+4tPtq1PFONQOY372VVZttSdLYm4Cg=; b=cPve1UmIVRAfPgLDlG+4qMCXt2lE2mTcKy75+HsQ/CgRdXV1isVB9jvyt9GSLTU2xf dm1sYivrlUiAuoOwnXAaGkg26T66ylVxtxMU2Gy15+/Ml5lBm2sufvq0EwuUYnGMIQ1e 2ZerSCJxS7pWf0L7EbNknZyIF/TwzjKdJvhI0lej9S2bG9esP0BCGW6nviwdedJYG5c2 4dcv2wVvXmToKIm6PfyVur6UMf9OTnvWkU0BYUdpUnQdgN0+/jLFRhcxQpC5zwL8bov8 13H611RQ25z0ChcpgzDVUnEPVu/49sC0nDxAQVRE/xKQg9SoSc5QVfpNHMCgvWFZXLdj vYbw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g12si13645797pla.363.2019.07.02.11.29.44; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 11:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726936AbfGBS3U (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 2 Jul 2019 14:29:20 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33934 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726627AbfGBS3U (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2019 14:29:20 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAA2137EE0; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 18:29:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from carbon (ovpn-200-45.brq.redhat.com [10.40.200.45]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7DA5C29A; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 18:29:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 20:29:07 +0200 From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer To: Ivan Khoronzhuk Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ilias Apalodimas , grygorii.strashko@ti.com, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, brouer@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: core: page_pool: add user refcnt and reintroduce page_pool_destroy Message-ID: <20190702202907.15fb30ce@carbon> In-Reply-To: <20190702152112.GG4510@khorivan> References: <20190702153902.0e42b0b2@carbon> <156207778364.29180.5111562317930943530.stgit@firesoul> <20190702144426.GD4510@khorivan> <20190702165230.6caa36e3@carbon> <20190702145612.GF4510@khorivan> <20190702171029.76c60538@carbon> <20190702152112.GG4510@khorivan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Tue, 02 Jul 2019 18:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 18:21:13 +0300 Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 05:10:29PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > >On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 17:56:13 +0300 > >Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 04:52:30PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > >> >On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 17:44:27 +0300 > >> >Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 04:31:39PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > >> >> >From: Ivan Khoronzhuk > >> >> > > >> >> >Jesper recently removed page_pool_destroy() (from driver invocation) and > >> >> >moved shutdown and free of page_pool into xdp_rxq_info_unreg(), in-order to > >> >> >handle in-flight packets/pages. This created an asymmetry in drivers > >> >> >create/destroy pairs. > >> >> > > >> >> >This patch add page_pool user refcnt and reintroduce page_pool_destroy. > >> >> >This serves two purposes, (1) simplify drivers error handling as driver now > >> >> >drivers always calls page_pool_destroy() and don't need to track if > >> >> >xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model() was unsuccessful. (2) allow special cases > >> >> >where a single RX-queue (with a single page_pool) provides packets for two > >> >> >net_device'es, and thus needs to register the same page_pool twice with two > >> >> >xdp_rxq_info structures. > >> >> > >> >> As I tend to use xdp level patch there is no more reason to mention (2) case > >> >> here. XDP patch serves it better and can prevent not only obj deletion but also > >> >> pool flush, so, this one patch I could better leave only for (1) case. > >> > > >> >I don't understand what you are saying. > >> > > >> >Do you approve this patch, or do you reject this patch? > >> > > >> It's not reject, it's proposition to use both, XDP and page pool patches, > >> each having its goal. > > > >Just to be clear, if you want this patch to get accepted you have to > >reply with your Signed-off-by (as I wrote). > > > >Maybe we should discuss it in another thread, about why you want two > >solutions to the same problem. > > If it solves same problem I propose to reject this one and use this: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/2/651 No, I propose using this one, and rejecting the other one. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer