From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B3DD5A5C for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:27:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214] helo=[192.168.0.10]) by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bHRvR-0001Pg-D0; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:29:50 +0200 To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Wiles, Keith" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <1466868582-66201-1-git-send-email-keith.wiles@intel.com> <1466870154-67659-1-git-send-email-keith.wiles@intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B7715C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Olivier Matz Message-ID: <5770E365.4060703@6wind.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:27:17 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B7715C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf:rearrange mbuf to be more mbuf chain friendly 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, 27 Jun 2016 08:27:27 -0000 On 06/27/2016 10:21 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Keith Wiles >> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 4:56 PM >> To: dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf:rearrange mbuf to be more mbuf chain friendly >> >> Move the next pointer to the first cacheline of the rte_mbuf structure >> and move the offload values to the second cacheline to give better >> performance to applications using chained mbufs. >> >> Enabled by a configuration option CONFIG_RTE_MBUF_CHAIN_FRIENDLY default >> is set to No. > > First, it would make ixgbe and i40e vector RX functions to work incorrectly. > Second, I don't think we can afford to allow people swap mbuf fields in the way they like. > Otherwise we'll end-up with totally unmaintainable code pretty soon. > So NACK. +1