From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
Wathsala Vithanage <wathsala.vithanage@arm.com>,
Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>,
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4] mbuf: optimize segment prefree
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 14:47:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251022144708.150069-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250827213535.21602-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Refactored rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() for both performance and readability.
With the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro, the common likely code path
now fits within one instruction cache line on x86-64 when built with GCC.
Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
---
v4:
* Enabled the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for GCC on all
architectures.
v3:
* Rewrote the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for readability; use
numerical value instead of long names. (Bruce Richardson)
* Enabled the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for Loongarch too.
v2:
* Fixed typo in commit description.
* Fixed indentation.
* Added detailed description to the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro.
(Stephen Hemminger)
* Added static_assert() to verify that the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT()
macro is valid, specifically that the tested bits are in the MSB of the
64-bit field.
---
lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 51 +++++++++++++++-------------------------
lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 3df22125de..2004391f57 100644
--- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
* http://www.kohala.com/start/tcpipiv2.html
*/
+#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <rte_common.h>
@@ -1458,44 +1459,30 @@ static inline int __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(struct rte_mbuf *m)
static __rte_always_inline struct rte_mbuf *
rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
{
- __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
-
- if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1)) {
-
- if (!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m)) {
- rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
- if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
- RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
- __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
- return NULL;
- }
-
- if (m->next != NULL)
- m->next = NULL;
- if (m->nb_segs != 1)
- m->nb_segs = 1;
+ bool refcnt_not_one;
- return m;
+ __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
- } else if (__rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0) {
+ refcnt_not_one = unlikely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) != 1);
+ if (refcnt_not_one && __rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) != 0)
+ return NULL;
- if (!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m)) {
- rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
- if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
- RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
- __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
- return NULL;
- }
+ if (unlikely(!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m))) {
+ rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+ if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
+ RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
+ __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
+ return NULL;
+ }
- if (m->next != NULL)
- m->next = NULL;
- if (m->nb_segs != 1)
- m->nb_segs = 1;
+ if (refcnt_not_one)
rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+ if (m->nb_segs != 1)
+ m->nb_segs = 1;
+ if (m->next != NULL)
+ m->next = NULL;
- return m;
- }
- return NULL;
+ return m;
}
/**
diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
index a0df265b5d..37f2975158 100644
--- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
+++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
@@ -706,6 +706,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf_ext_shared_info {
*/
#define RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(mb) ((mb)->ol_flags & RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL)
+#if !defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC) || defined __DOXYGEN__
/**
* Returns TRUE if given mbuf is direct, or FALSE otherwise.
*
@@ -714,6 +715,52 @@ struct rte_mbuf_ext_shared_info {
*/
#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) \
(!((mb)->ol_flags & (RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL)))
+#else /* RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC */
+#if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_LITTLE_ENDIAN
+/* Macro optimized for code size.
+ * GCC only optimizes single-bit MSB tests this way, so we do it by hand with multi-bit.
+ *
+ * The flags RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT and RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL are both in the MSB of the
+ * 64-bit ol_flags field, so we only compare this one byte instead of all 64 bits.
+ * On little endian architecture, the MSB of a 64-bit integer is at byte offset 7.
+ *
+ * Note: Tested on x86-64 using GCC version 16.0.0 20251019 (experimental).
+ *
+ * Without this optimization, GCC generates 17 bytes of instructions:
+ * movabs rax,0x6000000000000000 // 10 bytes
+ * and rax,QWORD PTR [rdi+0x18] // 4 bytes
+ * sete al // 3 bytes
+ * With this optimization, GCC generates only 7 bytes of instructions:
+ * test BYTE PTR [rdi+0x1f],0x60 // 4 bytes
+ * sete al // 3 bytes
+ *
+ * Note: Tested on loongarch using GCC version 15.2.0.
+ *
+ * Without this optimization, GCC generates 5 instructions:
+ * ld.d $a0, $a0, 24
+ * move $t0, $zero
+ * lu52i.d $t0, $t0, 1536
+ * and $a0, $a0, $t0
+ * sltui $a0, $a0, 1
+ * With this optimization, GCC generates only 3 instructions:
+ * ld.bu $a0, $a0, 31
+ * andi $a0, $a0, 0x60
+ * sltui $a0, $a0, 1
+ *
+ * Note: GCC also generates smaller code size with the optimized macro on many other architectures.
+ *
+ * Note: GCC generates the same code size as with the plain macro on ARM (64 and 32 bit).
+ */
+static_assert((RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) == UINT64_C(0x60) << (7 * CHAR_BIT),
+ "(RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) is not 0x60 at byte offset 7");
+#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) !(((const char *)(&(mb)->ol_flags))[7] & 0x60)
+#elif RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_BIG_ENDIAN
+/* As described above; but on big endian architecture, the MSB is at byte offset 0. */
+static_assert((RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) == UINT64_C(0x60) << (7 * CHAR_BIT),
+ "(RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) is not 0x60 at byte offset 0");
+#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) !(((const char *)(&(mb)->ol_flags))[0] & 0x60)
+#endif /* RTE_BYTE_ORDER */
+#endif /* RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC */
/** Uninitialized or unspecified port. */
#define RTE_MBUF_PORT_INVALID UINT16_MAX
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-22 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-27 21:35 [PATCH] " Morten Brørup
2025-08-27 23:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2025-10-06 17:46 ` Wathsala Vithanage
2025-10-06 18:26 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-06 14:49 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-20 12:02 ` [PATCH v2] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-20 14:24 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2025-10-21 8:38 ` fengchengwen
2025-10-22 9:08 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 13:53 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 14:12 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 14:14 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 13:23 ` [PATCH v3] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 14:47 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2025-10-22 15:02 ` [PATCH v4] " Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 18:28 ` Morten Brørup
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=20251022144708.150069-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=wathsala.vithanage@arm.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).