From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2450A0546; Thu, 27 May 2021 19:23:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93EB140150; Thu, 27 May 2021 19:23:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D089E40143 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 19:23:12 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: XKwmhMwoIoje74/CbR2zQstZG+6J5j62t0m6IPmjMkyve6gt2FJp2vIW1gOvlF5EFroWCl51We qhAuvVjqMGdQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9997"; a="263990816" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,228,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="263990816" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2021 10:22:33 -0700 IronPort-SDR: Krkk34PRFNz7Gb1+3FZ8/C6h24+XQ4So8Wii7ruYU+jqSXzwJv2la3NcEAoOR0j+ki1+/AZ0B3 uCjKIcpNlA1g== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,228,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="477579714" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.6.178]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 27 May 2021 10:22:31 -0700 Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 18:22:28 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Manish Sharma Cc: Morten =?iso-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C617E1@smartserver.smartshare.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy - fence and stream X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:39:59PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote: > For the case I have, hardly 2% of the data buffers which are being > copied get looked at - mostly its for DMA. Having a version of DPDK > memcopy that does non temporal copies would definitely be good. > If in my case, I have a lot of CPUs doing the copy in parallel, would > I/OAT driver copy accelerator still help? > It will depend upon the size of the copies being done. For bigger packets the accelerator can help free up CPU cycles for other things. However, if only 2% of the data which is being copied gets looked at, why does it need to be copied? Can the original buffers not be used in that case? Regards, /Bruce