From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD9C5916
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 19 May 2014 11:58:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19])
 by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 May 2014 02:58:55 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.98,866,1392192000"; d="scan'208";a="433884596"
Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159])
 by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 May 2014 02:58:54 -0700
Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.28) by
 IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.123.3; Mon, 19 May 2014 10:57:35 +0100
Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.183]) by
 IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003;
 Mon, 19 May 2014 10:57:34 +0100
From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "Shaw, Jeffrey B"
 <jeffrey.b.shaw@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 05/11] mbuf: merge physaddr and buf_len
 in a	bitfield
Thread-Index: AQHPa5Y7UQmjm/9lhE2IpeYLWH4ZEZs4UdoAgAAHYYCAAAGkgIAPJL6AgAAfw8CAAAKoAIAAF6Vw
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 09:57:33 +0000
Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA1B238@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1399647038-15095-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1399647038-15095-6-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <4032A54B6BB5F04B8C08B6CFF08C59285542081E@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <536CFCEF.4080704@6wind.com>
 <4032A54B6BB5F04B8C08B6CFF08C59285542085B@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <5379B25B.6050003@6wind.com>
 <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA1B1B2@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <5379CF3A.90609@6wind.com>
In-Reply-To: <5379CF3A.90609@6wind.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 05/11] mbuf: merge physaddr and buf_len
 in a	bitfield
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: Mon, 19 May 2014 09:58:57 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 10:31 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce; Shaw, Jeffrey B; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 05/11] mbuf: merge physaddr and buf_le=
n in
> a bitfield
>=20
>=20
> By the way, I think the absolute performance numbers are not so
> important in these tests. What is really important is to show the
> relative impact of the patches.
>=20

Well, yes and no. The relative performance is obviously what we are mostly =
looking for, but on the other hand we want to ensure that we are looking at=
 an optimised configuration. The impact to our top-line performance is of p=
rimary interest.

/Bruce=20