On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 08:03:53PM +0530, santosh wrote:

On Monday 04 September 2017 07:52 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:37:38AM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:

quoted

xmem_size and xmem_usage need to know the status of mp->flag.
Following patch will make use of that.

Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c |  5 +++--
 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c           | 10 ++++++----
 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h           |  8 ++++++--
 test/test/test_mempool.c                   |  4 ++--
 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c b/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c
index 73e82f808..ee0bda459 100644
--- a/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c
+++ b/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c

@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ _create_mempool(const char *name, unsigned elt_num, unsigned elt_size,
 	pg_shift = rte_bsf32(pg_sz);
 
 	rte_mempool_calc_obj_size(elt_size, flags, &objsz);
-	sz = rte_mempool_xmem_size(elt_num, objsz.total_size, pg_shift);
+	sz = rte_mempool_xmem_size(elt_num, objsz.total_size, pg_shift, NULL);
 	pg_num = sz >> pg_shift;
 
 	pa_arr = calloc(pg_num, sizeof(pa_arr[0]));

What is the meaning of passing NULL to rte_mempool_xmem_size()?
Does it mean that flags are ignored?

Yes that mean flags are ignored.

But the flags change the return value of rte_mempool_xmem_size(), right?
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we don't pass the proper flags, the
returned value won't be the one we expect.

quoted

Wouldn't it be better to pass the mempool flags instead of the mempool
pointer?

Keeping mempool as param rather flag useful in case user want to do/refer more
thing in future for xmem_size/usage() api. Otherwise he has append one more param
to api and send out deprecation notice.. Btw, its const param so won;t hurt right?

However if you still want to restrict param to mp->flags then pl. suggest.

Thanks.