From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD3DC71E for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:35:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2015 09:34:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,585,1432623600"; d="scan'208";a="533783975" Received: from kmsmsx154.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.73.14]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2015 09:34:58 -0700 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.153) by KMSMSX154.gar.corp.intel.com (172.21.73.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 00:34:56 +0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.45]) by SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.18]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 00:34:55 +0800 From: "Zhang, Helin" To: Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: config files maintenance Thread-Index: AQHQy6L2U6UVPprO9E6ycQAnRsT1/J31sekA//98iICAAIeJ8P//e84AgACUK4A= Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:34:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <2490473.jjJga3lrlm@xps13> <3062043.oWgikOttml@xps13> <1508851.EJxvAFadW3@xps13> In-Reply-To: <1508851.EJxvAFadW3@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] config files maintenance 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: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:35:06 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 8:43 AM > To: Zhang, Helin > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: config files maintenance >=20 > 2015-07-31 15:39, Zhang, Helin: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > 2015-07-31 15:29, Zhang, Helin: > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > > Can we remove i40e bulk alloc option? > > > > > > > > As the receiving functions are different for bulk_alloc or not, we = need this > flag. > > > > > > What brings the non bulk alloc function? > > > > Bulk-alloc means it will allocate mbufs in bulk, which was added > > before we supporting Vector PMD long long ago, to show the possible bet= ter > performance. > > I think all was disabled by default, and later it is enabled by default= for Linux. >=20 > Yes, I know that. My question was: > Why not removing the non bulk alloc Rx in i40e? > Who needs to disable I40E_RX_ALLOW_BULK_ALLOC? >=20 > I think you understand that the goal is remove some options and code usel= ess > nowadays (maintenance stuff). I remember that last time somebody else were discussing about removing that= , but finally gave up. Let me find out why they gave up, and then see if we c= an remove it later. Thanks, Helin