> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Roger Keith > Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 7:42 PM > To: <dev at dpdk.org> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Function __mempool_get_bulk() returns wrong count. > > > When __mempool_get_bulk() grabs entries from the cache it > returns zero instead of the number of entries obtained. Plus > the stats were increased by the wrong count of objects. > > Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at windriver.com> > --- > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h > b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h > index 299d4d7..6750e78 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h > @@ -988,9 +988,9 @@ __mempool_get_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, void > **obj_table, > > cache->len -= n; > > - __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success, n_orig); > + __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success, n);
As I can see n == n_orig. We can completely remove n_orig, but from other side - I don't see any harm here. > > - return 0; > + return n; As I can see, __mempool_get_bulk supposed to return 0, if all n objects were allocated from mbuf, or a negative error code otherwise. Check all usages of __mempool_get_bulk(), plus the fact that it does below: ret = rte_ring_mc_dequeue_bulk(mp->ring, obj_table, n); and rte_ring_mc_dequeue_bulk() is just wrapper for __rte_ring_mc_do_dequeue(..., n, RTE_RING_QUEUE_FIXED); I.e. - either allocate all n objects, or return with failure. So, yes we should return 0 here. The only thing that probably needs to be done here: fix the comments. Instead of: - >=0: Success; number of objects supplied. Something like: - 0: Success; n objects supplied. > > ring_dequeue: > #endif /* RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 */ > @@ -1004,7 +1004,7 @@ ring_dequeue: > if (ret < 0) > __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail, n_orig); > else > - __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success, n_orig); > + __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success, ret); That seems incorrect tom me. ret would be either 0 on success, or negative error value. Konstantin > > return ret; > } > -- > 2.1.0Keith Wiles, Principal Technologist with CTO office, Wind River mobile > 972-213-5533 As I can see
