RE: [PATCH v1] net/i40e: remove redundant number of packets check

["Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 12:44 AM
> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>;
> Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>; David Christensen
> <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>;
> Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Ruifeng Wang
> <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; nd@arm.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas@monjalon.net>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] net/i40e: remove redundant number of packets check
> 
> On 3/3/2022 2:28 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 9:54 AM
> >> To: Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>; David Christensen
> >> <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> >> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> >> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; nd@arm.com; Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>;
> >> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> >> Subject: [PATCH v1] net/i40e: remove redundant number of packets
> >> check
> >>
> >> For i40e_xmit_pkts_vec_xx function, it checks nb_pkts to ensure
> >> nb_pkts does not cross rs_thresh.
> >>
> >> However, in i40e_xmit_fixed_burst_vec_xx function, this check will be
> >> performed again. To improve code, delete this redundant check.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> >
> > Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel.
> >
> 
> Hi Qi,
> 
> This patch is not acked by the i40e maintainers.
> 
> And this is changing the datapath for the -rc3, two weeks before the release. Is
> it tested enough?
> 
> What is the gain with this patch, I don't see any numbers in the commit log.
> If the gain is small, can we postpone this patch to next release instead of getting
> it for -rc3?

The patch applied the same thing as below which I have reviewed.
https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220222224818.8612-1-kathleen.capella@arm.com/

I didn't see the risk of having it, and I will add a "reviewed-by" to avoid confusion, but if you think it's risky, we can still defer it to next-net.

Thanks
Qi