From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB9AA00BE; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:13:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70DD94068E; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:13:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB044068E for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:13:03 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1650359583; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bfDJyUHbq0QcW9I5nT0/hrKSGY8clHtzQkn9gCBMjo0=; b=LKGfTubG3U5dwxA/mA+dGZpgdV7VkJV1TYv12Shs40cfeIMKNsBznD77AyV0b66FQl2vtB gXw9Q1aAlBgLGlo6PFl6NVSVTriEFky4MUCV8jMpOwrke1cgfi25+Tv+RtfSk6gG6LdOhS geFgKGwcdGkxlIgzqI1PphxgzoKIioU= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-625-6Ly2j4L1Mz2ONGO_QLMyJQ-1; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 05:13:02 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 6Ly2j4L1Mz2ONGO_QLMyJQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 844C4101AA45; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 09:13:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.39.208.35] (unknown [10.39.208.35]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9034F4104960; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 09:13:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <389b7ac6-1828-013d-b9dd-8d539d212798@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:12:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/virtio: restore some optimisations with AVX512 To: David Marchand , dev@dpdk.org Cc: stable@dpdk.org, Chenbo Xia , Marvin Liu References: <20220411150420.17796-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> From: Maxime Coquelin In-Reply-To: <20220411150420.17796-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.11.54.1 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Hi Marvin, On 4/11/22 17:04, David Marchand wrote: > Those optimisations were only enabled with make builds, fix the meson > part. > > Fixes: 77d66da83834 ("net/virtio: add vectorized packed ring Rx") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand > --- > drivers/net/virtio/meson.build | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/meson.build b/drivers/net/virtio/meson.build > index 01a333ada2..d78b8278c6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/virtio/meson.build > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio/meson.build > @@ -30,11 +30,11 @@ if arch_subdir == 'x86' > c_args: [cflags, '-mavx512f', '-mavx512bw', '-mavx512vl']) > objs += virtio_avx512_lib.extract_objects('virtio_rxtx_packed.c') > if (toolchain == 'gcc' and cc.version().version_compare('>=8.3.0')) > - cflags += '-DVHOST_GCC_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > + cflags += '-DVIRTIO_GCC_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > elif (toolchain == 'clang' and cc.version().version_compare('>=3.7.0')) > - cflags += '-DVHOST_CLANG_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > + cflags += '-DVIRTIO_CLANG_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > elif (toolchain == 'icc' and cc.version().version_compare('>=16.0.0')) > - cflags += '-DVHOST_ICC_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > + cflags += '-DVIRTIO_ICC_UNROLL_PRAGMA' > endif > endif > endif I wonder how this was not spotted by the Intel performance lab? Is that these optimizations do not bring performance gains, or it is not benchmark-ed? Anyway: Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin Thanks, Maxime