From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <david.hunt@intel.com>
Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E8010DAD
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 17:14:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20])
 by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Dec 2016 08:14:15 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,389,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="46083207"
Received: from dhunt5-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.34])
 ([10.237.221.34])
 by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Dec 2016 08:14:14 -0800
To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
References: <1480567821-70846-2-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
 <1482381428-148094-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
 <1482381428-148094-2-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
 <20161222124753.GB8778@localhost.localdomain>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com
From: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>
Message-ID: <d8286409-b4b8-02bd-4594-c1752d37baa9@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 16:14:13 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161222124753.GB8778@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] lib: distributor performance
 enhancements
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 16:14:17 -0000


Thanks for the review, Jerin, I very much appreciate it. I'll address 
all the minor comments, and I've a comment or two on the remaining 
changes below.


On 22/12/2016 12:47 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 04:37:04AM +0000, David Hunt wrote:
>

--snip--

>> +
>> +	/* set the GET_BUF but even if we got no returns */
>> +	buf->retptr64[0] |= RTE_DISTRIB_GET_BUF;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#if RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSE2
>> +static inline void
> Move SSE version of the code to separate file so that later other SIMD arch
> specific version like NEON can be incorporated.
>

Sure. Will do. I'll model it on the i40e SIMD layout.


>> +		switch (d->dist_match_fn) {
>> +#ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSE2
> Is this conditional compilation flag is really required ? i.e
> RTE_DIST_MATCH_SSE will not enabled in non SSE case

So I can always leave the call to find_match_sse2 in there, but the 
run-time cpu flags check will
take care of whether it's called or not? OK sure.


Thanks,
Dave.