From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/30] net/mlx5: separate DPDK from Verbs
 Rx queue objects
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 15:57:08 -0700
Message-ID: <20171006225708.GB20117@yongseok-MBP.local>
References: <cover.1501681927.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
 <cover.1507207731.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
 <473a992610787eb996537bf2384cc314561f45f8.1507207731.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
 <20171006032637.GA19330@yongseok-MBP.local>
 <20171006085238.GP15330@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from EUR02-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-eopbgr00081.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.0.81])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FFA01AEE9
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat,  7 Oct 2017 00:57:34 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171006085238.GP15330@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 10:52:38AM +0200, Nélio Laranjeiro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:26:38PM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 02:49:42PM +0200, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> > [...]
> > > +struct mlx5_rxq_ibv*
> > > +mlx5_priv_rxq_ibv_get(struct priv *priv, uint16_t idx)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq_data = (*priv->rxqs)[idx];
> > > +	struct mlx5_rxq_ctrl *rxq_ctrl;
> > > +
> > > +	if (idx >= priv->rxqs_n)
> > > +		return NULL;
> > > +	if (!rxq_data)
> > > +		return NULL;
> > > +	rxq_ctrl = container_of(rxq_data, struct mlx5_rxq_ctrl, rxq);
> > > +	if (rxq_ctrl->ibv) {
> > > +		priv_mr_get(priv, rxq_data->mp);
> > 
> > One rxq_ibv has one mr as one rxq has one mp. As long as rxq_ibv exist, the mr
> > can't be released. So, it looks unnecessary to increase refcnt of the mr here.
> >[...]
> 
> But on MP can be shared among several queues, (see eth_rx_queue_setup()
> and eth_tx_queue_setup()), which means that a queue is not the single
> owner of the Memory pool and thus the memory region.
> 
> As the Memory region can be shared among several queues, it is necessary
> to increase/decrease the ref count accordingly.

Here again, as mr->refcnt is increased when it firstly referenced/created in
mlx5_priv_rxq_ibv_new(), I thought it was redundant. If so, priv_mr_release()
can also be called once when rxq_ibv is really destroyed.

Thanks,
Yongseok