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 63141C678
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:02:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214]
 helo=[192.168.0.10])
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1bGTaz-0005kT-8G; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:04:42 +0200
To: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
References: <1464101442-10501-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <57446C63.4040605@6wind.com> <20160524151654.GA10870@localhost.localdomain>
 <576D5837.3060907@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com,
 konstantin.ananyev@intel.com
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <576D5982.1060302@6wind.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:02:10 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <576D5837.3060907@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: replace c memcpy code semantics with
 optimized rte_memcpy
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, 24 Jun 2016 16:02:20 -0000

Hi Dave,

On 06/24/2016 05:56 PM, Hunt, David wrote:
> Hi Jerin,
> 
> I just ran a couple of tests on this patch on the latest master head on
> a couple of machines. An older quad socket E5-4650 and a quad socket
> E5-2699 v3
> 
> E5-4650:
> I'm seeing a gain of 2% for un-cached tests and a gain of 9% on the
> cached tests.
> 
> E5-2699 v3:
> I'm seeing a loss of 0.1% for un-cached tests and a gain of 11% on the
> cached tests.
> 
> This is purely the autotest comparison, I don't have traffic generator
> results. But based on the above, I don't think there are any performance
> issues with the patch.
> 

Thanks for doing the test on your side. I think it's probably enough
to integrate Jerin's patch .

About using a rte_memcpy() in the mempool_get(), I don't think I'll have
the time to do a more exhaustive test before the 16.07, so I'll come
back with it later.

I'm sending an ack on the v2 thread.