From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08ED2A0527; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:36:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049746883; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:35:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-il1-f194.google.com (mail-il1-f194.google.com [209.85.166.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948C76004 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:35:44 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-il1-f194.google.com with SMTP id z2so8256755ilh.11 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 05:35:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eUQnn0KSSMlR1khuPRzrmSlUjh/xYIIa42Rmj3cA6eQ=; b=Q+YXV9aWxlH8mD8A2Yo7BFs7Rur8BgubZxNpbvs18L6oRXa2Wsa8uwj9wSG6Q00GAs qkTeeamI7rKIsTSx8upQJ/5SnFDok6ZG3ACHnVjOV9qDR+A4wTjfxcncx44HTshYeeLp 7hAv0Glr2sQ35h0Yb+56vtvzg7MGJU1QuuaQz6zoEZy/DMS/ouBdOEMP69tXZfT31XoH 6L5sRlxWUukRecof1rN8Xml4YiUmkzO0rPhpSLLKVe82V+LA4M0pqwI7T3H3Hc7gWZHX 7F06RTjTNHr7caIlNHuVpwKgvSoWit6dpNyZA5HllRQ9x1m0X5R7x4+m8kvP0kRAiZq8 E8UQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eUQnn0KSSMlR1khuPRzrmSlUjh/xYIIa42Rmj3cA6eQ=; b=a+OIXC9kFi1iG4Q/2UIx4bceZugCRFZ6IN2trK5SobC56xN9OncXg06/TM0HjqflNt 6P+EyAAcSNd7VAHo7CUOE0Rnf+qn2qRL48NTbpD+nosZ+JH2m/SisHmw5IAHFuAYrFIx i32krAlRNcG8gAc08p/zfTXkm0IZKaHUf+oKj3btRTyOB5OQ8bmXz7Ra76l+nOqY0bg8 cSlw3D8fhKKsP0z7ofjETwq+3LgTtpQK7OyoVae2mJNP23zwB4JcqhX6CY7Vr8CSaWVJ cDrzElLRi3k2o9g3SxtyKz9f024fSUpwRfBHfQAROI90w+W7M0eYVUVOzv9XDqGjeKXT iPFA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Jc6KTZ9G+IcGOTOSSToCLP4o9os35afCo+SyRa9YJJSMDK+Ha Scq8zCsBdmcE4LnHouUPQfYG6Sd1pN39sX6yGmA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDChhebFstB5DclN14hEx3KcPjwXKMd3c8RUXHVDAPrhfYWFX+fjz8ng1afBfosRqZwn/9elD7iUShrHnUaW0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:52f:: with SMTP id h15mr9310987ils.60.1604928942609; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 05:35:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201107155306.463148-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20201109094732.GA831@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <2304322.cEvxdTIR8G@thomas> In-Reply-To: <2304322.cEvxdTIR8G@thomas> From: Jerin Jacob Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:05:26 +0530 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Bruce Richardson , dpdk-dev , David Marchand , Ferruh Yigit , Olivier Matz , =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Andrew Rybchenko , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Ajit Khaparde , Jerin Jacob , Hemant Agrawal , Ray Kinsella , Neil Horman , Nithin Dabilpuram , Kiran Kumar K Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] mbuf: move pool pointer in first half X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:29 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 09/11/2020 13:01, Jerin Jacob: > > Hi @Thomas Monjalon > > > > Any specific reason why you removed the static assert from octeontx2. > > I have a build failure when cross-compiling for octeontx2. I am trying the below command, I am not able to see any issue meson build --cross-file config/arm/arm64_octeontx2_linux_gcc Are you facing the issue with 32bit? Could you share the steps to reproduce and gcc version? > > > I am not able to compilation issue with that static assert. > > There is no issue when compiling for x86. > > > The current vector driver assumes pool and tx offload needs to 2 DWORDS apart, > > Which is the case before and after your change. > > You're right, pool and tx_offload are moved together. > The only difference is passing the cache line frontier. > > > Please remove that static assert change, No issue from my side on this patch. > > I cannot remove it without fixing something else, > maybe an issue in cache line alignment? Can try the below fix. If the issue is seen with 32bit. diff --git a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c index 6cebbe677..66a4d429d 100644 --- a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c +++ b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ nix_tx_offload_flags(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev) RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pkt_len) != offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, ol_flags) + 12); RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, tx_offload) != - offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * sizeof(void *)); + offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * sizeof(uint64_t)); > > > In general, it is too much effort to re-verify and measure performance > > impact with > > all the cases after RC2, I hope this will last mbuf change in this release. > > Yes it is the last change to mbuf layout, > sorry for pushing all these changes so late. > > >