> > >>>> (also, i don't really like the name NO_PAGE_BOUND since in > > >>>> memzone API there's a "bounded memzone" allocation API, and this > > >>>> flag's name reads like objects would not be bounded by page size, > > >>>> not that they won't cross page > > >>>> boundary) > > >>> > > >>> No strong opinion for the name. What name you suggest? > > >> > > >> How about something like MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT? > > > > > > Looks good to me. > > > > > > In summary, Change wrt existing patch" > > > - Change NO_PAGE_BOUND to MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT > > > - Set this flag in rte_pktmbuf_pool_create () when > > rte_eal_has_hugepages() || > > > rte_malloc_heap_socket_is_external(socket_id)) > > > > If we are to have a special KNI allocation API, would we even need that? > > Not need this change in rte_pktmbuf_pool_create () if we introduce a new > rte_kni_pktmbuf_pool_create () API.
Ferruh, Olivier, Anatoly, Any objection to create new rte_kni_pktmbuf_pool_create () API to embedded MEMPOOL_F_NO_PAGE_SPLIT flag requirement for KNI + IOVA as VA > > > > > > > > > Olivier, Any objection? > > > Ref: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/55277/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Anatoly
