From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com (mail-wm0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D646CCA for ; Mon, 9 May 2016 19:28:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id n129so147236453wmn.1 for ; Mon, 09 May 2016 10:28:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0Hbkzz4ZlHy8RpQzZdBkp/Cz07G5OoDm1Lg11i4BNjA=; b=E+QWQP28uNVfhoFokayRhl6o/jvB9HfOR2LXm2ufVWGUuCuYI+JaMtn5MKmDdC3EY9 qiqdR0Bpf10REUlC2dUjmOu2EmNZ1tX3SRPzmMYTZi3GVXcO5jaYSApioNZytZUEoICl UoaRhM+ILY++IZ70615TxRgv9a0eGX6MAUltJt/7pSHPSnIhrvd5QIB8B6dG4ckMRHJd VoMUxG6jn/iQgPlQwxFBXf9UoJUJ7izI+R9/bKgJJKbEpr+ui4UhPA+7aSpwVDyCDJ/U pvkSVCDPwINWL8InBfTEQjjHr3Mv4HW8xy1ldfbuE9j+R2tZTR0nLEiVEMErAFndu1NK txeg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0Hbkzz4ZlHy8RpQzZdBkp/Cz07G5OoDm1Lg11i4BNjA=; b=Ze/r22047ros6wnEPxsP+gIt+7Qj15aBQE+U2P9S60Ve4ojBmrmnoS6qKpMCv8Px2M znf/Xt9au8lopjLjoBjsgxhSlOn3u8cRzr8cXCevvAl5LRlbQ1qx6abvtuPqvt2rcbJn X9N0s4TDSfFl8KQeL2BIcHZ1S0czJZ39ItYOl0kmbl4SY78/MNl/0yjRi2GPRcaeF8ea mZzBs1GE5LAWfc1CUuuyF4PM9Y9gHD+7i4SXl6yNYxAukylLjrYHBIKeI0lDba+7nX8Y MNzVJTwUWwMuYvAuYb1e6M7BWnYt59ep2oco3ZfqTFmGfkZ0Y1yGcpui0JcAze9Pn/P8 gyCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX/Lx6QjOEgvYQhEKpFJPNWoRHwbQDs8HIWVMhRns5Y1apMK2IMZE4EHuX133SYCa8O X-Received: by 10.194.69.106 with SMTP id d10mr34965562wju.165.1462814912552; Mon, 09 May 2016 10:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v143sm25641813wmv.4.2016.05.09.10.28.31 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 09 May 2016 10:28:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Olivier Matz Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 19:28:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4117859.zS18yWBYLJ@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1462810707-7434-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> References: <1462810707-7434-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: add helpers to prefetch mbuf 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, 09 May 2016 17:28:32 -0000 2016-05-09 18:18, Olivier Matz: > +/** > + * Prefetch the second part of the mbuf > + * > + * The next 64 bytes of the mbuf corresponds to fields that are used in the > + * transmit path. If the cache line of the architecture is higher than 64B, > + * this function does nothing as it is expected that the full mbuf is > + * already in cache. > + * > + * @param m > + * The pointer to the mbuf. > + */ > +static inline void > +rte_mbuf_prefetch_part1(struct rte_mbuf *m) It is not so natural to call rte_mbuf_prefetch_part1() for the second part. Why not start mbuf parts numbering at 1?