Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/5] page_pool: update document about frag API

On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 20:04:39 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:

quoted

Seems like the semantics of page_pool_alloc() are always better than
page_pool_alloc_frag(). Is there a reason to keep these two separate?  

I am agree the semantics of page_pool_alloc() is better, I was thinking
about combining those two too.
The reason I am keeping it is about the nic hw with fixed buffer size for
each desc, and that buffer size is always smaller than or equal to half
of the page allocated from page pool, so it doesn't bother doing the
checking of 'size << 1 > max_size' and doesn't care about the actual
truesize.

I see. Let's reorg the documentation, then? Something along the lines
of, maybe:


The page_pool allocator is optimized for recycling page or page frag used by skb
packet and xdp frame.

Basic use involves replacing napi_alloc_frag() and alloc_pages() calls
with page_pool_alloc(). page_pool_alloc() allocates memory with or
without page splitting depending on the requested memory size.

If the driver knows that it always requires full pages or its allocates
are always smaller than half a page, it can use one of the more specific
API calls:

1. page_pool_alloc_pages(): allocate memory without page splitting when
   driver knows that the memory it need is always bigger than half of the
   page allocated from page pool. There is no cache line dirtying for
   'struct page' when a page is recycled back to the page pool.

2. page_pool_alloc_frag(): allocate memory with page splitting when driver knows
   that the memory it need is always smaller than or equal to half of the page
   allocated from page pool. Page splitting enables memory saving and thus avoid
   TLB/cache miss for data access, but there also is some cost to implement page
   splitting, mainly some cache line dirtying/bouncing for 'struct page' and
   atomic operation for page->pp_frag_count.