From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECBF195D4 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:37:11 +0100 (CET) Received: by wmuu63 with SMTP id u63so143064169wmu.0 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 06:37:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type; bh=EOIVt/dkEDpa8c0Qxme/yqNEpKDIMpAmmh7iH+hCW24=; b=0h3sXV8rzFKhsjrtYdn2BAjEGtnrOhoJ/ZZxSIUb37f+mLSFm0764PsvuEJMl7YDBM 8ZvALI7fJK7lb/h89nGeDH2Ak55Axps1TwW3BRti7LHCJWkMmBCGxQpy5QR/JMF4QCtN Zivz7YAOsaSnNjNpr9CtjOlHU6YLaQSbGm/sbZo0eKN/luzCeO4Vyayuex9pfGWeZXtT /W4M4G+OZSnjEOa84rpuW1MGmHw3oRto/eWIVtgUsHMRSSEUfQ19hJbGRLW+xDvYFjdq XknhQbnKywknmzlRQzZShlH+IOrRorG6HdybHe+QRlFps3JveYs1ljbPO5irHtcoFhyG sBig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=EOIVt/dkEDpa8c0Qxme/yqNEpKDIMpAmmh7iH+hCW24=; b=bLpJdRDpNNAv5hYVesEvLHqifFCbihnV8+v1GdJ4sBwPoxO6lAfE9ublmRsonF0qEp rb0KcNtmJumioFTug0sEAMYjZTdx3h/sXPuXnKuX0t36NrH3nud8OT2YVgFkXha7gStS SMg/xO0RjPq4PaJctYppuBH2V0X8wptbjxQGDTaPpLzTb6vfCUFylMaIYKpTAFx56Lla Hc4B831Fo6lonkWbpNp5QY+vFkMxBhrwZr5vtKEFpehcEBO8xkDRqXX2LHWCAx+ENVBp FyWUHWqmhJu3CXNi+/t/5X6wwq89OpcHPB6IrRH8sMRfgG9HDeOQIdTunIC278ZTbKo6 Bu/g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn6YlsjgWIsJuoqwrKwTJszbQrVAbuY3EpFXm2bOfkkDXFve2fJaZr3JmYcypG7BYn17m9F X-Received: by 10.194.110.5 with SMTP id hw5mr38911648wjb.154.1449499031757; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 06:37:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q74sm22031229wmd.0.2015.12.07.06.37.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 07 Dec 2015 06:37:11 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 15:35:58 +0100 Message-ID: <5319870.TBdLd4mWKW@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20151207143300.GA20063@localhost.localdomain> References: <1449417564-29600-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> <1624480.dTEes5qyS3@xps13> <20151207143300.GA20063@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] fix performance/cache resource issues with 128-byte cache line targets X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 14:37:12 -0000 2015-12-07 20:03, Jerin Jacob: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 03:40:13AM -0800, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2015-12-07 12:56, Jerin Jacob: > > > On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 05:30:50PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 2015-12-06 21:29, Jerin Jacob: > > > > > This patchset fixes performance/cache resource issues with 128-byte cache line targets > > > > > found in mbuf and bitmap DPDK libraries > > > > > > > > > > Currently, we have two DPDK targets(ThunderX and ppc_64) which are based on > > > > > 128-bytes cache line size target. > > > > > > > > When introducing IBM Power8, we failed to clean the cache line size definition. > > > > I promised to not forget this issue in this thread with Neil: > > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-December/009439.html > > > > > > > > It is defined in > > > > config/defconfig_* > > > > mk/machine/*/rte.vars.mk > > > > mk/arch/*/rte.vars.mk > > > > rte_memory.h > > > > rte_kni_common.h > > > > > > > > It should be defined only in the config files. > > > > When we will introduce a configure script, we should be able to detect it. > > > > > > > > Please Jerin, as ThunderX maintainer, may you help to fix this old mess? > > > > > > Yes Thomas, I will takeup this issue when we will have configure script. > > > > I thought we could start setting the value in only one place. > > The detection in configure script would be another step. > > OK Thomas, I have sent the cleanup patch. Please review it. You are too fast :) I will review it but it will be deferred to 2.3.