From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600211B8A9 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:48:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6B0C210C9; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:48:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:48:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=w2qbqHs8Wu0PErzGWdolBSw4zd udlNMGxpUqZ276WG4=; b=DSFVMrVpQ4OIPj3vR74YHdGBcY+2XDU/s8TaUOTnge 7Zyie9CxgwIv+XWEROebJHggibcsWI1RHDy1a04eSQJ8fFlpn8a7b9f9fG4GxL5S mqGzzGsNZEiJg0i7+1rSGapxL2/JvgoeVTaGTLOSjaZLLNguupNXrzxz0JNeUZuB Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=w2qbqH s8Wu0PErzGWdolBSw4zdudlNMGxpUqZ276WG4=; b=XYJzfe3+vVddLUS0UxJXda IxrvIKLd3E+YvOSF5pIRBgzfmx5QBjsgzY6LknaKB0Wrel0s3C8dPXyHPK7iOX0c D6Yfi3HQhfZuhrNUakrySKdhjXUi+ouHNCFAmjavbGNp2pw+nY2/P2AoFnbdbjTj ClZcD2rDe/17X6o09kn1l+hFQ263zNcS1W44BgTQCAWZB7+1iy2totA+0wI7kdSV eoOENvkwFzU/iTIQ5WsFA0YVN8vVtFF60JD57oig0MudNvMtJcoPoXYUaqRJYGZi au7goBj4ygtzkAehuAmVsn+r5Y4agJEH94sAl6GiDlWT64EdkIUIMkpiL1vxirkw == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7D1B57E3D5; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:48:31 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Konstantin Ananyev Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:47:45 +0100 Message-ID: <3552780.vzqTqTtnLr@xps> In-Reply-To: <1516028971-3409-1-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> References: <1516028680-2342-3-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <1516028971-3409-1-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] eal/x86: Use lock-prefixed instructions to reduce cost of rte_smp_mb() X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:48:32 -0000 15/01/2018 16:09, Konstantin Ananyev: > On x86 it is possible to use lock-prefixed instructions to get > the similar effect as mfence. > As pointed by Java guys, on most modern HW that gives a better > performance than using mfence: > https://shipilev.net/blog/2014/on-the-fence-with-dependencies/ > That patch adopts that technique for rte_smp_mb() implementation. > On BDW 2.2 mb_autotest on single lcore reports 2X cycle reduction, > i.e. from ~110 to ~55 cycles per operation. > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson Applied, thanks