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 0B804A0588; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C5C1D9C7; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A801D996 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:55 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: pkcDRzJmWJTyt5AaYX0uDoEXLMztZRx/OsDxL7NeOYWXfgjnnQOH5V15HjlDGzDgCDvk1CUifU oicq5QGyq+aA== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Apr 2020 07:02:54 -0700 IronPort-SDR: QTQwNEq4ynrKWXKaDftaiXv5LLN73rKoo7BIgNK9rT8LxqQ4QJB94Dy7FCdCing44/++vy94SM dIS1/TM9f9oA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,391,1580803200"; d="scan'208,217";a="455275343" Received: from vmedvedk-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.249.42.159]) ([10.249.42.159]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Apr 2020 07:02:50 -0700 To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, yipeng1.wang@intel.com, sameh.gobriel@intel.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com References: <20553707.Yz81rIOvuz@thomas> From: "Medvedkin, Vladimir" Message-ID: <26233198-907c-cf1c-f5ef-154d54c2ed7f@intel.com> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:02:49 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20553707.Yz81rIOvuz@thomas> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] add new k32v64 hash table 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" Hi Thomas, On 16/04/2020 10:39, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 15/04/2020 20:17, Vladimir Medvedkin: >> Currently DPDK has a special implementation of a hash table for >> 4 byte keys which is called FBK hash. Unfortunately its main drawback >> is that it only supports 2 byte values. >> The new implementation called K32V64 hash >> supports 4 byte keys and 8 byte associated values, >> which is enough to store a pointer. >> >> It would also be nice to get feedback on whether to leave the old FBK >> and new k32v64 implementations or deprecate the old one? >> >> v3: >> - added bulk lookup >> - avx512 key comparizon is removed from .h >> >> v2: >> - renamed from rte_dwk to rte_k32v64 as was suggested >> - reworked lookup function, added inlined subroutines >> - added avx512 key comparizon routine >> - added documentation >> - added statistic counters for total entries and extended entries(linked list) > Please use --in-reply-to so we can follow version changes > in the same email thread. > Also I am changing the states in patchwork as superseded. > Please remind updating status of old patches. > Hmm, strange, I used --in-reply-to. Also in patchwork I can see In-Reply-To: -- Regards, Vladimir