[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAC_iWjKr-Jd7DsAameimUYPUPgu8vBrsFb0cDJiNSBLEwqKF1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 10:02:59 +0300
From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul@...com>, willy@...radead.org, almasrymina@...gle.com,
kernel_team@...ynix.com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
hawk@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] shrinking struct page (part of page pool)
Hi Jakub
[...]
> > >
> > > struct bump {
> > > unsigned long _page_flags;
> > > unsigned long bump_magic;
> > > struct page_pool *bump_pp;
> > > unsigned long _pp_mapping_pad;
> > > unsigned long dma_addr;
> > > atomic_long_t bump_ref_count;
> > > unsigned int _page_type;
> > > atomic_t _refcount;
> > > };
> > >
> > > To netwrok guys, any thoughts on it?
> > > To Willy, do I understand correctly your direction?
> > >
> > > Plus, it's a quite another issue but I'm curious, that is, what do you
> > > guys think about moving the bump allocator(= page pool) code from
> > > network to mm? I'd like to start on the work once gathering opinion
> > > from both Willy and network guys.
>
> I don't see any benefit from moving page pool to MM. It is quite
> networking specific. But we can discuss this later. Moving code
> is trivial, it should not be the initial focus.
Random thoughts here until I look at the patches.
The concept of devices doing DMA + recycling the used buffer
transcends networking. But I agree with you, that's something we can
discuss on the reviews.
Thanks
/Ilias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists