From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:60690 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726817AbgCLLBC (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:01:02 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id i24so5206wml.1 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:01:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= Subject: Re: Shared Umem between processes In-Reply-To: References: <69569dcbc4ce450eb5b2c1905bf11208@hm.edu> <046ac5d67f6a447f98266eacaa2c25e5@hm.edu> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:00:56 +0100 Message-ID: <87sgidon13.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: xdp-newbies-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= , "Gaul, Maximilian" Cc: Xdp Björn Töpel writes: > On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 10:17, Gaul, Maximilian wrote: >> > [...] >> >> Thank you so much Björn! >> >> just to wrap things up: >> >> - if I want to distribute packet processing from a single RX-Queue to >> multiple sockets I have to use shared umem because it is not possible >> to bind multiple af-xdp sockets onto the same RX-Queue > > Correct! And you need a tailored XDP program that spreads over the > shared umem sockets! Could we lift this restriction? Not with zero-copy, obviously, but if there's a copy involved it seems it should be possible to support several sockets on the same RXQ? That would make it possible to use XDP as a per-CPU load balancer for a single RXQ, like we can do with cpumap for packets hitting the stack today? -Toke