From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84455106B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  5 Jun 2015 11:08:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [37.164.37.64] (helo=[192.168.42.157])
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1Z0ngE-0002yn-Dq; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:12:51 +0200
Message-ID: <557166ED.9070204@6wind.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:07:57 +0200
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
References: <1433151145-8176-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <20150603105948.GC12832@bricha3-MOBL3>
In-Reply-To: <20150603105948.GC12832@bricha3-MOBL3>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: optimize first reference increment in
 rte_pktmbuf_attach
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:08:13 -0000

Hi Bruce,

On 06/03/2015 12:59 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:32:25AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
>> As it's done in __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), we can avoid using an
>> atomic increment in rte_pktmbuf_attach() by checking if we are the
>> only owner of the mbuf first.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
>> ---
>>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 6 +++++-
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>> index ab6de67..cea35b7 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
>> @@ -838,7 +838,11 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
>>  	else
>>  		md = rte_mbuf_from_indirect(m);
>>  
>> -	rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, 1);
>> +	/* optimize the case where we are the only owner */
>> +	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(md) == 1))
>> +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 2);
>> +	else
>> +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, 1);
>>  	mi->priv_size = m->priv_size;
>>  	mi->buf_physaddr = m->buf_physaddr;
>>  	mi->buf_addr = m->buf_addr;
>> -- 
>> 2.1.4
>>
> Why not make the change inside rte_mbuf_refcnt_update itself? If it is ever
> called with a current refcnt of 1, it should always be safe to do the update
> without a cmpset.

Good idea, I'll see if I can do that in a new version.

Thanks,
Olivier


> 
> /Bruce
>