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;
Date:   Thu, 4 Jul 2019 17:33:25 +0200
From:   Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To:     Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com" 
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>, brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: stmmac: Introducing support for Page
 Pool
Message-ID: <20190704173325.2e21cc93@carbon>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR12MB32692AA2F18A530D56383739D3FA0@BYAPR12MB3269.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
References: <cover.1562149883.git.joabreu@synopsys.com>
        <1b254bb7fc6044c5e6e2fdd9e00088d1d13a808b.1562149883.git.joabreu@synopsys.com>
        <20190704113916.665de2ec@carbon>
        <BYAPR12MB326902688C3F40BB3DA6EEEBD3FA0@BYAPR12MB3269.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
        <20190704170920.1e81ed6e@carbon>
        <BYAPR12MB32692AA2F18A530D56383739D3FA0@BYAPR12MB3269.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 15:18:19 +0000
Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com> wrote:

> From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
> 
> > You can just use page_pool_free() (p.s I'm working on reintroducing
> > page_pool_destroy wrapper).  As you say, you will not have in-flight
> > frames/pages in this driver use-case.  
> 
> Well, if I remove the request_shutdown() it will trigger the "API usage 
> violation" WARN ...
> 
> I think this is due to alloc cache only be freed in request_shutdown(), 
> or I'm having some leak :D

Sorry, for not being clear.  You of-cause first have to call
page_pool_request_shutdown() and then call page_pool_free().

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer