On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:50 PM Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
wrote:

>
> > No problem.
> > BTW: Please don't top-post in replying - it's best practice to put
> > the reply below the text you are replying to. Thanks.
>
> Ohh, I got it :)
> I was triming the quotes when replying but in top-post format,
> will always try to avoid top-post in replying in future!
>
> > AVX2 was first available in systems starting in 2013, (and AMD systems
> > since 2015), so at this point it's been around a long time. The SSE code
> > paths in the drivers will only be used by systems which do not have AVX2
> on
> > them - which should be relatively rare, I hope, at this point. There are
> no
> > features in the SSE driver that are not available in the AVX2 one, so,
> I'm
> > not aware of any reason why one would need to use the SSE code path in a
> > deployment of DPDK.
>
> Yes, I think all feaures in SSE do already exists in AVX2 paths.
>
> > Even without this patch, there will be no features added to the SSE code
> > paths in the drivers. Any new additions would just be to the AVX2 and
> > AVX-512 code paths. Even for systems without AVX2, if the SSE path is
> > removed the driver will fall-back to the scalar paths, which have far
> more
> > features available in them than the SSE codepaths, which were simplified
> for
> > performance reasons.
>
> Thanks for the update. I could not exaclty got the meaning of fall-back to
> the scalar path.
> Does that means that the driver automatically switches to the scalar path
> ?
> which is slower but includes all the necessary features that were
> simplified in the AVX2 path.
> I believe AVX2 provides an average performance much better for small frame
> or packet size (about 14 Gbps).
>
> Reagards,
> Khadem
>
>
>

--