Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] rte_mbuf: scattered pktmbufs freeing optimization

[Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>]

Hi Vadim,

On 02/27/2015 06:09 PM, Vadim Suraev wrote:
>  >Indeed, this function looks useful, and I also have a work in progress
>  >on this topic, but currently it is not well tested.
> I'm sorry, I didn't know. I'll not interfere with my patch))

That not what I wanted to say :)

You are very welcome with your patch, I just wanted to notify
that I am also working in the same area and that's why I listed
the things I'm currently working on.


>  >About the inlining, I have no objection now, although Stephen may be
>  >right. I think we can consider un-inline some functions, based on
>  >performance measurements.
> I've also noticed in many cases it makes no difference. Seems to be some
> trade-off.
>
>  >- clarify the difference between raw_alloc/raw_free and
>  >  mempool_get/mempool_put: For instance, I think that the reference
>  >  counter initialization should be managed by rte_pktmbuf_reset() like
>  >  the rest of the fields, therefore raw_alloc/raw_free could be replaced
> It looks useful to me since not all of the fields are used in every
> particular application so
> if the allocation is decoupled from reset, one can save some cycles.

Yes, this is also a trade-off between maintainability and speed, and
speed is probably the first constraint for the dpdk. But maybe we can
find an alternative that is both fast and maintainable.

Thanks,
Olivier