From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9621F471BB; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 22:19:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BD87402DE; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 22:19:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ua1-f49.google.com (mail-ua1-f49.google.com [209.85.222.49]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D313A4028C for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 22:19:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ua1-f49.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-94121102a54so2355841241.1 for ; Thu, 08 Jan 2026 13:19:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1767907191; x=1768511991; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=XG9OJUD//24onCMyZl0y+KA4Wbw5mkHgwGRHf3VZbi4=; b=Mm4BDlu2EjaX9xmMTIwZ+/fl409b7UOWatZifLzruhrDNJYbtiuWgNRPk+AMK4K0W8 eoo8n9thoA2ynxFYnfN4mLlvQvs/bOLabOskUBuvR3v1mO/U414g42EaT6vhH+vabJA9 5gsFuKCNMSGL3htx+s3+T4iCTiwulejsHT+K1Dm+REOYkEXIBB4SHwarDaCmcyjgAU56 26n8PwQFNctgxmS/2VfM9c/iUGq0hODOdu97F56OEIe3sXKX+ComljIYdJ8VG5EI1gzO G56ZYfccBDQSmkWa+QXDoc/43Cmq3mw00w2l4UBPL0IzlKgx6tX3DVNmmCgEhMpa/MgQ BeLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1767907191; x=1768511991; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XG9OJUD//24onCMyZl0y+KA4Wbw5mkHgwGRHf3VZbi4=; b=vUh//yGgSKtkU29S7cazhWUcM33wAXKrc1i8YmW13Ab3BroxDZXz2utpfs0ZLDpwfh aNw8gd/HguN2UKYvPZoNDNJPDX5UbKGf8psLDIG/W9FMxEtLMmeLdtHGPVb7F4GyvnaM ywytuiuqQnl8SRiKexDCtqpkZxfaBQ7gchMs+4UyfGwwSFb7eGqQGIB9PG53mdWiIfiq 05PaasSKlEwnqi51qU8hd+NQSrFfxcqWJtn01oY2yoxFJVqMO7ayq1N2loHCryjo8YG+ gwKNXDZzLnEV83xbzddcRjURuBEX+7B4BJw710CchgiscXG3f0NzlYDC2YKsDK5XZ/9J b3Xg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyd+jnUdGA7bWQBTqBuDXVvX8K8TzTmDtSsUCCweq+gtSwsv0aR IS18ZQJkER1Rz2w4iHL8xTuUsCm3bZ7qCLDd9Mdd1iHF3NBkqwsvPvqqaUOXmfT3eSXzbav6AbV cj19Kj0MF/jecs6vGOtwe+Cy3QijuB2M= X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX5sVkd9xGuJS62vl8B38GtTeSBm4vRpPGx83sDZAHUbIO57+u3fKOKTYvQ2lpU fwHqu78lzeJi0oFtWxTN5LOOijW7ZXgsQ7d6Pz+Vst4vpLmog2VESOyuT1B681P2tI7KTwAUStO qyz2rba6YPSdhFbqicTrJTrYzoNZjzjyRfOiq9fCXvqTSmv5D4sJlrzWoklPHLC0JDV01OuG2O3 mdjPh0Plz0DKnuFNvpIrs1S6TGjn37KDNJVUBMle4kYeRhg5vQvqeDglm4QMxaabQZ9SiNnk6F6 1rFqt46O6T4VPctTXNb46CILoNA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHhwdPDAHrtGfsETl/stYnH/6k8fg4gy7DFouZO+cnH6Ux2Oo/2c2WrnMHKnrJV6qOgayeudmm9qe4n4vlVxYo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:2d04:b0:5ef:2457:8011 with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-5ef24578298mr107401137.21.1767907189591; Thu, 08 Jan 2026 13:19:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20260108061338.27217-1-scott.k.mitch1@gmail.com> <20260108081229.60b095b9@phoenix.local> In-Reply-To: <20260108081229.60b095b9@phoenix.local> From: Scott Mitchell Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 16:19:37 -0500 X-Gm-Features: AZwV_QhFM1OWEXjvOgSs25I_eyOkc8mUxohWc-gU-0KKEwQA0wkwc9K4838vNUM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] net: optimize raw checksum computation To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org, mb@smartsharesystems.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 11:12=E2=80=AFAM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 01:13:38 -0500 > scott.k.mitch1@gmail.com wrote: > > > +#ifdef RTE_CC_GCC > > + /* Suppress GCC -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive. No assembly= /runtime impacts. */ > > + asm volatile("" : "+m" (psd_hdr)); > > +#endif > > > > Maybe rte_compiler_barrier() will do same thing? Agreed it feels like a compiler bug but looking for advice if I'm missing something :) My initial concern with rte_compiler_barrier is its a general barrier which may have broader impacts on optimizations and compiled code. Will that be an issue in this case? I wasn't sure and the approach in the patch is targeted at a specific variable and assembly from clang/gcc was the same. I will introduce a macro to make it cleaner and I can replace it with rte_compiler_barrier if preferred.