From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B436EA0032;
	Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:56:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999A742766;
	Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:56:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4236140DDD
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:56:53 +0100 (CET)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: rte_memcpy alignment
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:56:50 +0100
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86E00@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: rte_memcpy alignment
Thread-Index: AdgJJKuLTRnjdnFpTB+l82T17Hz8Jg==
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Jan Viktorin" <viktorin@rehivetech.com>,
 "Ruifeng Wang" <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>,
 "David Christensen" <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 "Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 "Konstantin Ananyev" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

Dear ARM/POWER/x86 maintainers,

The architecture specific rte_memcpy() provides optimized variants to =
copy aligned data. However, the alignment requirements depend on the =
hardware architecture, and there is no common definition for the =
alignment.

DPDK provides __rte_cache_aligned for cache optimization purposes, with =
architecture specific values. Would you consider providing an =
__rte_memcpy_aligned for rte_memcpy() optimization purposes?

Or should I just use __rte_cache_aligned, although it is overkill?


Specifically, I am working on a mempool optimization where the objs =
field in the rte_mempool_cache structure may benefit by being aligned =
for optimized rte_memcpy().


Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards,
-Morten Br=F8rup