On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:43 PM Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 3:14 PM > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com> > > Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>; Andrew Rybchenko > > <arybche...@solarflare.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Asaf Penso > > <as...@mellanox.com>; Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mempool: introduce indexed memory pool > > > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:25 PM Xueming Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > > > > Indexed memory pool manages memory entries by index, allocation from > > > pool returns both memory pointer and index(ID). users save ID as u32 > > > or less(u16) instead of traditional 8 bytes pointer. Memory could be > > > retrieved from pool or returned to pool later by index. > > > > > > Pool allocates backend memory in chunk on demand, pool size grows > > > dynamically. Bitmap is used to track entry usage in chunk, thus > > > management overhead is one bit per entry. > > > > > > Standard rte_malloc demands malloc overhead(64B) and minimal data > > > size(64B). This pool aims to such cost saving also pointer size. > > > For scenario like creating millions of rte_flows each consists of > > > small pieces of memories, the difference is huge. > > > > > > Like standard memory pool, this lightweight pool only support fixed > > > size memory allocation. Pools should be created for each different > > > size. > > > > > > To facilitate memory allocated by index, a set of ILIST_XXX macro > > > defined to operate entries as regular LIST. > > > > > > By setting entry size to zero, pool can be used as ID generator. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com> > > > --- > > > lib/librte_mempool/Makefile | 3 +- > > > lib/librte_mempool/rte_indexed_pool.c | 289 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > lib/librte_mempool/rte_indexed_pool.h | 224 ++++++++++++++++ > > > > Can this be abstracted over the driver interface instead of creating a new > > APIS? > > ie using drivers/mempool/ > > The driver interface manage memory entries with pointers, while this api uses > u32 index as key...
I see. As a use case, it makes sense to me. Have you checked the possibility reusing/extending lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bitmap.h for bitmap management, instead of rolling a new one?
