From: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"Wathsala Vithanage" <wathsala.vithanage@arm.com>,
Fengchengwen <fengchengwen@huawei.com>,
"Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5] mbuf: optimize segment prefree
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 08:51:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c556ea7b92a24bc09ac5240da39bc36c@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251023080136.165513-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com>
>
> Refactored rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() for both performance and readability.
>
> With the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro, the common likely code path
> now fits within one instruction cache line on x86-64 when built with GCC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>
> Acked-by: Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> ---
> v5:
> * Removed the plain RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro, and only use the optimized
> variant. (Bruce Richardson)
> Further testing on Godbolt confirmed that other compilers benefit from
> the optimized macro too.
> * Shortened the description of the RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro, and only
> provide one example of code emitted by a compiler. (Bruce Richardson)
> * Consolidated the static_assert() into one, covering both little and big
> endian.
> This also reduces the amount of endian-conditional source code and
> improves readability.
> (Bruce Richardson)
> * Added comment about MSB meaning "most significant byte".
> v4:
> * Enabled the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for GCC on all
> architectures.
> v3:
> * Rewrote the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for readability; use
> numerical value instead of long names. (Bruce Richardson)
> * Enabled the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro for Loongarch too.
> v2:
> * Fixed typo in commit description.
> * Fixed indentation.
> * Added detailed description to the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT() macro.
> (Stephen Hemminger)
> * Added static_assert() to verify that the optimized RTE_MBUF_DIRECT()
> macro is valid, specifically that the tested bits are in the MSB of the
> 64-bit field.
> ---
> lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 51 +++++++++++++++-------------------------
> lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> index 3df22125de..2004391f57 100644
> --- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
> * http://www.kohala.com/start/tcpipiv2.html
> */
>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
> #include <stdint.h>
>
> #include <rte_common.h>
> @@ -1458,44 +1459,30 @@ static inline int
> __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(struct rte_mbuf *m)
> static __rte_always_inline struct rte_mbuf *
> rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
> {
> - __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
> -
> - if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1)) {
> -
> - if (!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m)) {
> - rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> - if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
> - RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
> - __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
> - return NULL;
> - }
> -
> - if (m->next != NULL)
> - m->next = NULL;
> - if (m->nb_segs != 1)
> - m->nb_segs = 1;
> + bool refcnt_not_one;
>
> - return m;
> + __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
>
> - } else if (__rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0) {
> + refcnt_not_one = unlikely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) != 1);
> + if (refcnt_not_one && __rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) != 0)
> + return NULL;
>
> - if (!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m)) {
> - rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> - if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
> - RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
> - __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
> - return NULL;
> - }
> + if (unlikely(!RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m))) {
> + rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> + if (RTE_MBUF_HAS_EXTBUF(m) &&
> + RTE_MBUF_HAS_PINNED_EXTBUF(m) &&
> + __rte_pktmbuf_pinned_extbuf_decref(m))
> + return NULL;
> + }
>
> - if (m->next != NULL)
> - m->next = NULL;
> - if (m->nb_segs != 1)
> - m->nb_segs = 1;
> + if (refcnt_not_one)
> rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
> + if (m->nb_segs != 1)
> + m->nb_segs = 1;
> + if (m->next != NULL)
> + m->next = NULL;
>
> - return m;
> - }
> - return NULL;
> + return m;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> index a0df265b5d..1dfeab0511 100644
> --- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> +++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> @@ -711,9 +711,36 @@ struct rte_mbuf_ext_shared_info {
> *
> * If a mbuf embeds its own data after the rte_mbuf structure, this mbuf
> * can be defined as a direct mbuf.
> - */
> -#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) \
> - (!((mb)->ol_flags & (RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL)))
> + *
> + * Note: Macro optimized for code size.
> + *
> + * The plain macro would be:
> + * #define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) \
> + * (!((mb)->ol_flags & (RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL)))
> + *
> + * The flags RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT and RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL are both in the
> MSB (most significant
> + * byte) of the 64-bit ol_flags field, so we only compare this one byte instead of all
> 64 bits.
> + *
> + * E.g., GCC version 16.0.0 20251019 (experimental) generates the following code
> for x86-64.
> + *
> + * With the plain macro, 17 bytes of instructions:
> + * movabs rax,0x6000000000000000 // 10 bytes
> + * and rax,QWORD PTR [rdi+0x18] // 4 bytes
> + * sete al // 3 bytes
> + * With this optimized macro, only 7 bytes of instructions:
> + * test BYTE PTR [rdi+0x1f],0x60 // 4 bytes
> + * sete al // 3 bytes
> + */
> +#if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +/* On little endian architecture, the MSB of a 64-bit integer is at byte offset 7. */
> +#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) !(((const char *)(&(mb)->ol_flags))[7] & 0x60)
> +#elif RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_BIG_ENDIAN
> +/* On big endian architecture, the MSB of a 64-bit integer is at byte offset 0. */
> +#define RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(mb) !(((const char *)(&(mb)->ol_flags))[0] & 0x60)
A stupid q: why then not simply do:
(mb->ol_flags >> 56) & 0x60
then?
Should help to all these LE/BE casts, etc.
> +#endif
> +/* Verify the optimization above. */
> +static_assert((RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) ==
> UINT64_C(0x60) << (7 * CHAR_BIT),
> + "(RTE_MBUF_F_INDIRECT | RTE_MBUF_F_EXTERNAL) is not 0x60 at MSB");
>
> /** Uninitialized or unspecified port. */
> #define RTE_MBUF_PORT_INVALID UINT16_MAX
> --
> 2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-23 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-27 21:35 [PATCH] " Morten Brørup
2025-08-27 23:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2025-10-06 17:46 ` Wathsala Vithanage
2025-10-06 18:26 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-06 14:49 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-20 12:02 ` [PATCH v2] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-20 14:24 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2025-10-21 8:38 ` fengchengwen
2025-10-22 9:08 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 13:53 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 14:12 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 14:14 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 13:23 ` [PATCH v3] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 14:47 ` [PATCH v4] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-22 15:02 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-22 18:28 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 7:04 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 8:01 ` [PATCH v5] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 8:08 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-23 8:51 ` Konstantin Ananyev [this message]
2025-10-23 11:17 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 14:04 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2025-10-23 14:48 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 15:27 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2025-10-23 15:46 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 16:03 ` Bruce Richardson
2025-10-23 16:24 ` Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 12:48 ` [PATCH v6] " Morten Brørup
2025-10-23 16:18 ` [PATCH v7] " Morten Brørup
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c556ea7b92a24bc09ac5240da39bc36c@huawei.com \
--to=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=wathsala.vithanage@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).