From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com (mail-qk0-f178.google.com [209.85.220.178]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079DB37B4 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 10:48:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id s5so102310268qkd.0 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 01:48:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=whMxhjV+pRSTwRLubcJFyZCFMxA4U7QmhEvX7iAoks8=; b=Lv0J1/hGyGEJCtOPXbeJSSXdCbU3a6pKRkyupfkQV4Tc3YPPW4Zl/b3QdeYsaPxFhR x7FSeQ//Y4dT8oTcNAN1HxpI4/uImC3GAAmWoSEgMXXmWedGQpYCZE49OXr3CdCE7wuQ 05On2f93TPxQOCZzP9rdaJ5Cr/FSTTMA2CwUQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=whMxhjV+pRSTwRLubcJFyZCFMxA4U7QmhEvX7iAoks8=; b=mYQIAFrYmP57bjLKnH50IDRCgEbMR29acf722zoLGsBjqKaULfGMuYtWQ6GBKcMZuY et4bH3K0HOxxdxHn1WqyxqPgMee1IM/lFFzRxkxERIK8yyU6XT2qyWxZ9gHX8TYAJ1aY cA+R1GVPqO9yIZybiZZB4iazhVmQQAwMhHYk1kiu+Y4ofwUD3C6+smo8efSZJD5yRZ9J JASKFTrLiDv6yjj4XCNLOCnhGhyieNhK+hXW5UK184Fh782hXaA0tNSOdWAPy+7dVn45 cyDjCVTvIVXLrAxL0RiamgDbtOXvMIhqDr5On88/KSDlNUzbOt09e6XFDFzllyoA0gnh 12Uw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIvjqgdO45kUQQj/UkoRgoenTLs9VjHPOvIX0jX4CCtrL9e+ZIQMVIOaQtzh1R0Wt2m6EoydfQO99cd7wlK MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.37.87.6 with SMTP id l6mr13142986ybb.160.1459154897508; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 01:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.202.11 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 01:48:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E032143C2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1457965558-15331-1-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09090343BBF2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20160316111454.GB24668@bricha3-MOBL3> <20160318100358.GA4848@bricha3-MOBL3> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B1FAE1@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E032143C2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:48:17 +0800 Message-ID: From: Jianbo Liu To: "Xu, Qian Q" Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Zhang, Helin" , "dev@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ixgbe: avoid unnessary break when checking at the tail of rx hwring X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 08:48:18 -0000 Hi Qian, On 28 March 2016 at 10:30, Xu, Qian Q wrote: > Jianbo > Could you tell me the case that can reproduce the issue? We can help eval= uate the impact of performance on ixgbe, but I'm not sure how to check if y= our patch really fix a problem because I don=E2=80=99t know how to reproduc= e the problem! Could you first teach me on how to reproduce your issue? Or = you may not reproduce it by yourself? > It is more an refactoring to original design than fixing an issue. So I don't know how to reproduce either. Can you use your usual performance testing cases first, and see if there is any impact or improvement? Thanks! Jianbo