On 3/27/2019 9:00 AM, Xiaolong Ye wrote:
> Try to check if external mempool (from rx_queue_setup) is fit for
> af_xdp, if it is, it will be registered to af_xdp socket directly and
> there will be no packet data copy on Rx and Tx.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> index a1fda9212..c6ade4c94 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ struct xsk_umem_info {
> struct xsk_umem *umem;
> struct rte_mempool *mb_pool;
> void *buffer;
> + uint8_t zc;
> };
>
> struct rx_stats {
> @@ -85,6 +86,7 @@ struct pkt_rx_queue {
>
> struct pkt_tx_queue *pair;
> uint16_t queue_idx;
> + uint8_t zc;
> };
>
> struct tx_stats {
<...>
> @@ -630,6 +685,13 @@ eth_rx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
>
> internals->umem = rxq->umem;
>
> + if (mb_pool == internals->umem->mb_pool)
> + rxq->zc = internals->umem->zc;
> +
> + if (rxq->zc)
> + AF_XDP_LOG(INFO,
> + "zero copy enabled on rx queue %d\n", rx_queue_id);
> +
The "zero copy" implemented in this patch, also the variable 'zc', is from
'af_xdp' umem to mbuf data via versa copy, right?
There is also another "zero copy" support in af_xdp, device to buffers...
Do you think can these be confused with each other, should we have another log
message and variable name for this one?
Indeed I can't think of a good name, but something like, "pmd/driver zero copy"
& 'pmd_zc' ??
