DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>, <dev@dpdk.org>,
	<david.marchand@redhat.com>, <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	<olivier.matz@6wind.com>, <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	<andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>, <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>,
	<ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>, <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	<hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, "Ray Kinsella" <mdr@ashroe.eu>,
	"Neil Horman" <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Nithin Dabilpuram" <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>,
	"Kiran Kumar K" <kirankumark@marvell.com>, <techboard@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] mbuf: move pool pointer in first half
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:30:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C61408@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201109100838.GC831@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 11:09 AM
> 
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 07:57:05PM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 7, 2020 4:53 PM
> > >
> > > The mempool pointer in the mbuf struct is moved
> > > from the second to the first half.
> > > It should increase performance on most systems having 64-byte cache
> line,
> > > i.e. mbuf is split in two cache lines.
> >
> > Perhaps with the #define DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MBUF_FAST_FREE mentioned by
> Konstantin, it might be better moving m->next instead, at least for
> applications with the opportunity to set this flag (e.g. applications
> with only one mbuf pool).
> >
> > Unfortunately, the information about the
> DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MBUF_FAST_FREE flag came to light after the techboard
> meeting, and I don't have any benchmarks to support this suggestion, so
> I guess it's hard to change the techboard's decision to move the pool
> pointer.
> >
> 
> The thing with FAST_FREE is that it doesn't just indicate that there is
> only one mbuf pool, but rather that none of the packets are chained
> mbufs
> either. Therefore, the flag applies equally to both next and pool
> pointers
> for optimization. [And the flag should perhaps be two flags!]

I guess we could offer the same optimization to applications by adding a rte_mbuf_raw_free_bulk() function to the mbuf library. I will put that on my ToDo-list. :-)



  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-09 10:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-07 15:53 Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-07 17:12 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-07 18:39   ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-07 19:05     ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-07 20:33       ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09  5:18         ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09  8:04           ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09  8:27             ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09  9:47               ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-09 12:01                 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09 12:59                   ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09 13:35                     ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09 14:02                       ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09 14:08                         ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09 14:42                           ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09 14:53                             ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09  8:16           ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-09 10:06             ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] " Bruce Richardson
2020-11-09 10:21               ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-09 18:04                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-11-10  7:15                   ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-07 18:57 ` [dpdk-dev] " Morten Brørup
2020-11-09 10:08   ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-09 10:30     ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2020-11-09 10:33     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-09 10:36       ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-09 11:24       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-11-09 21:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] move mbuf pool pointer Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-09 21:29   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] drivers: disable OCTEON TX2 in 32-bit build Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-10 18:05     ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-09 21:29   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] mbuf: move pool pointer in first half Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-10 10:05     ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-10 10:44       ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-10 16:25     ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-10 18:06       ` Jerin Jacob
2020-11-12 14:39         ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-10 18:08       ` Stephen Hemminger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C61408@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
    --to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
    --cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=kirankumark@marvell.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=mdr@ashroe.eu \
    --cc=ndabilpuram@marvell.com \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=techboard@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=viacheslavo@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).