Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Aug 2013 17:08:24 +0200
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Navdeep Parhar <np@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: M_NOFREE removal (was Re: svn commit: r254520 - in head/sys: kern sys)
Message-ID:  <5214D7E8.1080106@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <52129E55.30803@freebsd.org>
References:  <201308191116.r7JBGsc6065793@svn.freebsd.org> <521256CE.6070706@FreeBSD.org> <5212587A.2080202@freebsd.org> <52128937.1010407@freebsd.org> <52129E55.30803@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20.08.2013 00:38, Peter Grehan wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
>   (moving to the more appropriate freebsd-net)
>
>> I'm sorry for ambushing but this stuff has to be done.  I have provided
>> an alternative way of handling it and I'm happy to help you with your
>> use case to make it good for you and to prevent the mbuf system from
>> getting bloated and hackish again.
>
>   Sure. I'm not really upset since my code wasn't too far along, but with any API, you never know
> who consumers might be so it's always worth being proactive about announcing it's removal.

Agreed.  OTOH there wasn't any in-tree user of it and posting before such removals
always yields at least one obscure hand wavy use or potential use of it.  So nothing
ever happens.

>> Can you please describe your intended use of M_NOFREE to better understand
>> the shortcomings of the current mbuf systems and the additional advantages
>> of the M_NOFREE case?
>
>   I was looking at something similar to Linux's vhost-net, where a guest's virtio ring would be
> processed in-kernel. An mbuf chain with external buffers would be used to pass guest tx buffer/len
> segments directly into FreeBSD drivers.

Is that like page flipping?

>   The intent of M_NOFREE was to avoid small mbuf allocations/frees in what is a hot path. This code
> was intended to run at 10/40G.
>
>   Note this code isn't really generic - it would require interfaces to be 'owned' by the guest,
> except that direct PCI-level pass-through wouldn't be needed.

Do you have some example code showing how that is or can be done?

>   If there's an alternative to M_NOFREE, I'd be more than happy to use that.

Set up your own (*ext_free) function and omit freeing of the mbuf itself.  Make
sure to properly track your mbufs to avoid leaking them.

-- 
Andre




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5214D7E8.1080106>