From: "Medvedkin, Vladimir" <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>
To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>, bruce.richardson@intel.com
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com, gavin.hu@arm.com, nd@arm.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/lpm: remove unnecessary inline
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:51:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e5900a6f-2227-9185-6e1a-7841171ee328@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190619053615.24613-3-ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
Hi Wang,
1. It is better to explicitly use __rte_noinline with this function
because my gcc still inlines it even without the inline qualifier.
2. The same should be applied to _v20 functions.
3. Please try running the tests again and show the results.
4. Make this patch the first in a series.
On 19/06/2019 06:36, Ruifeng Wang wrote:
> Tests showed that the 'inline' keyword caused performance drop
> on some x86 platforms after the memory ordering patches applied.
> By removing the 'inline' keyword, the performance was recovered
> as before on x86 and no impact to arm64 platforms.
>
> Suggested-by: Medvedkin Vladimir <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
> ---
> v2: initail version to recover rte_lpm_add() performance
>
> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> index 0addff5d4..c97b602e6 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> @@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ add_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static inline int32_t
> +static int32_t
> add_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> uint32_t next_hop)
> {
> @@ -975,7 +975,7 @@ add_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static inline int32_t
> +static int32_t
> add_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth,
> uint32_t next_hop)
> {
--
Regards,
Vladimir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-19 12:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-19 5:36 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] lib/lpm: memory orderings to avoid race conditions for v1604 Ruifeng Wang
2019-06-19 5:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] lib/lpm: memory orderings to avoid race conditions for v20 Ruifeng Wang
2019-06-19 5:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/lpm: remove unnecessary inline Ruifeng Wang
2019-06-19 12:51 ` Medvedkin, Vladimir [this message]
2019-06-20 10:34 ` Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
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=e5900a6f-2227-9185-6e1a-7841171ee328@intel.com \
--to=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gavin.hu@arm.com \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=ruifeng.wang@arm.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).