From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] examples/l2fwd: increase pktmbuf pool size
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 02:11:14 +0530
Message-ID: <20171228204113.ljlkmeycmntjvbfg@Pavan-LT>
References: <20171228201906.22770-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20171228123642.39c7aca4@xeon-e3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com, pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com,
	dev@dpdk.org
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-co1nam03on0074.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.40.74])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B0C523D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 21:41:39 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171228123642.39c7aca4@xeon-e3>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://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 Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 12:36:42PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 01:49:06 +0530
> Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
> > +/*
> > + * This expression is used to calculate the number of mbufs needed
> > + * depending on user input, taking  into account memory for rx and
> > + * tx hardware rings, cache per lcore and mbuf pkt burst per port
> > + * per lcore. RTE_MAX is used to ensure that NB_MBUF never goes below
> > + * a minimum value of 8192
> > + */
> > +#define NB_MBUF RTE_MAX(\
> > +		nb_ports * (nb_rxd + nb_txd + MAX_PKT_BURST +\
> > +		nb_lcores * MEMPOOL_CACHE_SIZE), (unsigned int)8192)
>
> Why not put this inplace where it is used, rather than keeping
> the define? Also good practice with macros is to not have the
> macro depend on variables that are in context at that point.

Currently, l3fwd is doing the same thing with macros but I do agree it
would be clean using it inplace will modify in next version.

>
> You also don't need a cast of (unsigned int)8192, use 8192u instead

Thanks for the heads up will remove the cast in next version.

Pavan.