From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id E764FA05D3 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:03:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A403195; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:03:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from APC01-SG2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092253040.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.253.40]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0732C19 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:03:47 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kOaakDGdo/I8LRoTOk82QHIRfVEu2sVawaLoFh5WxOU=; b=ONRfSBqX1+7zO8pfNaAHrlaP00Vf2h+Bwhk0TjTZ8n9BMq5M1su7DHZFeIGS5rRemOuIVgYPxOVPWgpJUV9LGxdJj280VVIy5a/a0rOm+OJC+Z37lyNdRldfQLvoR2Klz2UyUtWNBRHyGdFRgkPGJ12Yr1Wy9jUTa9WgkAHteurUyV4wJIBpPAO5ULO2EjbqtdQsFOTx6Bs3EMDFY9jck/NKC0gCUxdJELCnxSUhhGuWfpLHfd3l0fAz38tOe1NUB4T52wgA71Y5HYMYIT6Q2unSyJqc35hdFa1GZldZhiNMj6QO1gbZtNZ6pgiQOdaTrwZUL+w/2RBeGeAx+FXOtg== Received: from SG2APC01FT030.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.250.53) by SG2APC01HT162.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.251.171) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.1730.9; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:03:45 +0000 Received: from TY2PR04MB3808.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.152.250.60) by SG2APC01FT030.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.250.200) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.1730.9 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:03:45 +0000 Received: from TY2PR04MB3808.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8cd1:6c8c:14cf:4478]) by TY2PR04MB3808.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8cd1:6c8c:14cf:4478%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1730.019; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:03:45 +0000 From: Dell Will To: users Thread-Topic: Why not prefetch the second cache line of struct rte_mbuf for better performance ? Thread-Index: AQHU47LRM/ZH6IaskkW9FTl23HVx5A== Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:03:45 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-clientproxiedby: HK0PR03CA0019.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:203:2e::31) To TY2PR04MB3808.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:404:102::15) x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:2009CE7E37A14813D793E727D3F294E744F19F7D5DF2590FD24C04EC4F8023CD; UpperCasedChecksum:5E6C3880BC0D3D34DB97689B73BD0AD47A33D6AA585B09381DA91C8203D7DD8D; SizeAsReceived:7428; Count:51 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-guid: 7B7E14AB-A2FB-4A01-ABA2-A2162FE74B9D x-has-attach: no x-mailer: Foxmail 7.2.9.156[cn] x-tmn: [uTXNILk+eyTcFAyAQFCeUTJrw61WsWTl] x-microsoft-original-message-id: <2019032617034283195616@hotmail.com> x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-incomingheadercount: 51 x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(20181119110)(201702061078)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(9123020)(9118020)(2017031324274)(2017031322404)(2017031323274)(1601125500)(1603101475)(1701031045); SRVR:SG2APC01HT162; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SG2APC01HT162: x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: MfJqMcW1xzD+5dpoUmZEpk8pdYfs5W3FRLa3gKOdCxIZJIwur4qLHT4a1r9Hn8Wf MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b9ee3ed2-8a43-47a6-81c9-08d6b1c9f3a3 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2019 09:03:45.6097 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SG2APC01HT162 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] Why not prefetch the second cache line of struct rte_mbuf for better performance ? X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Hello, everybody I find that many codes in DPDK only prefetch the first cache line of struct= rte_mbuf. The struct rte_mbuf has 2 cache lines. Why not prefetch the second line ? Is it hinted that the CPU (x64 or ARM) always automatically prefetch the ne= xt immediately followed cache line ? Thanks a lot ! ________________________________ coolwilled@hotmail.com