From: bugzilla@dpdk.org
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: [DPDK/core Bug 1984] Increase memzone name size
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:27:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-1984-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/> (raw)
http://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1984
Bug ID: 1984
Summary: Increase memzone name size
Product: DPDK
Version: 26.07
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: Normal
Component: core
Assignee: dev@dpdk.org
Reporter: mb@smartsharesystems.com
Target Milestone: ---
"32 bytes ought to be enough for anybody."
Said nobody.
Many object types have names, and at object creation, they create sub-objects,
adding a prefix to the name of the sub-object. The sub-objects may create its
own sub-objects (with another prefix added to the name) etc..
E.g. when creating a mempool named "example", the mempool lib creates a memzone
named "MP_example", and the mempool ring driver (a sub-object of the mempool)
creates a memzone named "RG_MP_example".
Assuming the FIB and RIB libs also added proper prefixes (which the currently
don't), the names would go:
"example" (FIB name),
"FIB_example" (RIB name),
"RIB_FIB_example" (mempool name),
"MP_RIB_FIB_example" (memzone name created by the mempool),
"RG_MP_RIB_FIB_example" (memzone name created by the ring driver).
One of the FIB6 test cases creates a FIB with the name "test_drift_compression"
(22 chars). Adding prefixes, it should end up being
"RG_MP_RIB_FIB_test_drift_compression" (36 chars).
I suggest increasing RTE_MEMZONE_NAMESIZE from 32 to 64.
This seems simple on the surface, as it does no harm to the rte_memzone
structure itself.
However, it has a ripple effect into other object types, whose name sizes are
derived by this, e.g. the rte_ring and the rte_mempool structures.
When the size of the name field in those structures is increased, other fields
in the structures will move down, and may end up in a different cache line.
So, all structures depending on RTE_MEMZONE_NAMESIZE must be carefully reviewed
and adjusted, so their fields are grouped efficiently, considering cache lines.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
reply other threads:[~2026-08-12 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-1984-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/ \
--to=bugzilla@dpdk.org \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox