On Monday 25 September 2017 08:28 AM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:48:36PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
>> DPDK has support for both sw and hw mempool and
>> currently user is limited to use ring_mp_mc pool.
>> In case user want to use other pool handle,
>> need to update config RTE_MEMPOOL_OPS_DEFAULT, then
>> build and run with desired pool handle.
>>
>> Introducing eal option to override default pool handle.
>>
>> Now user can override the RTE_MEMPOOL_OPS_DEFAULT by passing
>> pool handle to eal `--mbuf-pool-ops=""`.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shu...@caviumnetworks.com>
>> Acked-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agra...@nxp.com>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_internal_cfg.h
>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_internal_cfg.h
>> @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ struct internal_config {
>> volatile enum rte_intr_mode vfio_intr_mode;
>> const char *hugefile_prefix; /**< the base filename of hugetlbfs
>> files */
>> const char *hugepage_dir; /**< specific hugetlbfs directory to
>> use */
>> -
>> + const char *mbuf_pool_name; /**< mbuf pool name */
>> unsigned num_hugepage_sizes; /**< how many sizes on this system */
>> struct hugepage_info hugepage_info[MAX_HUGEPAGE_SIZES];
>> };
> What do you think about mbuf_pool_ops_name instead?
>
> I'm afraid of the confusion we could have with the name
> of the mempool.
>
Hoping that we're doing final renaming on handle, Its the third time and so for
other mempool series.
queued for v5.
