From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] vhost: do not use rte_memcpy for
	virtio_hdr copy
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:35:58 +0800
Message-ID: <20160127063558.GI4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1449122773-25510-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
 <1449122773-25510-5-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5AFED9@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20160127032245.GB4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5B04AB@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20160127060236.GG4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5B05A6@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Victor Kaplansky <vkaplans@redhat.com>,
 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68EB09410
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:35:35 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5B05A6@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 06:16:37AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> On 1/27/2016 2:02 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 05:56:56AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> >> On 1/27/2016 11:22 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:46:39AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> >>>> On 12/3/2015 2:03 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >>>>> +	if (vq->vhost_hlen == sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf)) {
> >>>>> +		*(struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf *)(uintptr_t)desc_addr = hdr;
> >>>>> +	} else {
> >>>>> +		*(struct virtio_net_hdr *)(uintptr_t)desc_addr = hdr.hdr;
> >>>>> +	}
> >>>> Thanks!
> >>>> We might simplify this further. Just reset the first two fields flags
> >>>> and gso_type.
> >>> What's this "simplification" for? Don't even to say that we will add
> >>> TSO support, which modifies few more files, such as csum_start: reseting
> >>> the first two fields only is wrong here.
> >> I know TSO before commenting, but at least in this implementation and
> >> this specific patch, i guess zeroing two fields are enough.
> >>
> >> What is wrong resetting only two fields?
> > I then have to ask "What is the benifit of resetting only two fields"?
> > If doing so, we have to change it back for TSO. My proposal requires no
> > extra change when adding TSO support.
> 
> ? Benefit is we save four unnecessary stores.

Hmm..., the hdr size is 12 bytes at most. I mean, does it really matter,
coping 3 bytes, or coping 12 bytes in a row?

	--yliu