Re: Process question: reviewing older patches

Thanks Thomas and Neil. Sadly, no joy. While I generally like gmail for my
mail, there's not a reasonable way to import the mbox file or to control
the message id.

If someone else wants to resend the message to the list, I can reply to
that. Otherwise, here are the relevant bits from the original patch email:

From patchwork Wed Jul 23 06:45:12 2014

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [dpdk-dev] kni: optimizing the rte_kni_rx_burst
From: Hemant Agrawal <redacted>
X-Patchwork-Id: 84
Message-Id: [off-list ref]
To: <redacted>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:15:12 +0530

The current implementation of rte_kni_rx_burst polls the fifo for buffers.
Irrespective of success or failure, it allocates the mbuf and try to put
them into the alloc_q
if the buffers are not added to alloc_q, it frees them.
This waste lots of cpu cycles in allocating and freeing the buffers if
alloc_q is full.

The logic has been changed to:
1. Initially allocand add buffer(burstsize) to alloc_q
2. Add buffers to alloc_q only when you are pulling out the buffers.

Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <redacted>

---
lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c |    8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c b/lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c
index 76feef4..01e85f8 100644
--- a/lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c
+++ b/lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c

@@ -263,6 +263,9 @@ rte_kni_alloc(struct rte_mempool *pktmbuf_pool,

  ctx->in_use = 1;

+ /* Allocate mbufs and then put them into alloc_q */
+ kni_allocate_mbufs(ctx);
+
  return ctx;

 fail:

@@ -369,8 +372,9 @@ rte_kni_rx_burst(struct rte_kni *kni, struct rte_mbuf

**mbufs, unsigned num)
 {
  unsigned ret = kni_fifo_get(kni->tx_q, (void **)mbufs, num);

- /* Allocate mbufs and then put them into alloc_q */
- kni_allocate_mbufs(kni);
+ /* If buffers removed, allocate mbufs and then put them into alloc_q */
+ if(ret)
+ kni_allocate_mbufs(kni);

  return ret;
 }

The patch looks good from a DPDK 1.6r2 viewpoint. We saw the same behavior
in our app and ended up avoiding it higher in the stack (in our code).

Reviewed-by: Jay Rolette <redacted>

Jay

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Neil Horman [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:52:48AM -0600, Jay Rolette wrote:

quoted

There's a fairly old KNI patch (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/84/)
that I reviewed, but I'm not seeing how to submit my "Reviewed-by" when I
don't have any of the emails from the patch in my mail client.

I can copy the text from the 'mbox' link in Patchwork into an email, but
I'm guessing that may not make the patch toolchain happy.

What's the right way to do this?

Just grab the message id from the patchwork site, and list it in the
envelope
headers in-reply-to: field when you respond.  You won't have the rest of
the
conversation field in the thread, but you will respond properly to the
thread,
and patchwork will pick up the ACK
Neil

quoted

Thanks,
Jay