From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: next releases Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:06:07 +0200 Message-ID: <2353283.PtiVvKdYNr@xps13> References: <1598074.SMl35i2x6y@xps13> <53FE0FA5.8020900@tilera.com> <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B0343ECAF0@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: "Richardson, Bruce" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B0343ECAF0-kPTMFJFq+rELt2AQoY/u9bfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" 2014-08-28 08:41, Richardson, Bruce: > As for rte_rdtsc_precise, I'm not sure about its origins, but I'm > surprised to see that it does not correspond to the rdtscp instruction. > Can anyone else comment on this one? I would assume it's designed > to be used to get more accurate measurements of smaller blocks of > code that we want to benchmark, since rdtsc works best when timing > larger blocks (in terms of cycle counts, that is, not source lines :-) ). The good thing with git history (and well written commit logs) is that we can easily get such answer: http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=3314648f83c3dc06d7d9a Bruce, do you know how rdtscp is supported across Intel processors? -- Thomas