From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA38C4C90
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  4 Oct 2018 15:59:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
 [10.5.11.27])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08F4E86671;
 Thu,  4 Oct 2018 13:59:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.36.112.13] (unknown [10.36.112.13])
 by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E56C9E8DE;
 Thu,  4 Oct 2018 13:59:06 +0000 (UTC)
To: Jens Freimann <jfreimann@redhat.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: tiwei.bie@intel.com, Gavin.Hu@arm.com
References: <20181003131118.21491-1-jfreimann@redhat.com>
From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <298c0223-1440-e6ae-de0a-2400adc46051@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 15:59:03 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181003131118.21491-1-jfreimann@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.27
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16
 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Thu, 04 Oct 2018 13:59:10 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/8] implement packed virtqueues
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2018 13:59:11 -0000

Hi Jens,

On 10/03/2018 03:11 PM, Jens Freimann wrote:
> To support out-of-order processing I used the vq_desc_extra struct to
> add a .next field and use it as a list for managing descriptors. This
> seemed to add less complexity to the code than adding a new data
> structure to use as a list for packed queue descriptors.

Looking at the series, I don't see a specific path when in-order has
been negotiated. Is it intended?
Wouldn't we save some cache misses when assuming packets are processed
in-order?

Maxime