From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tetsuya Mukawa Subject: Re: some questions about rte_memcpy Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 19:23:49 +0900 Message-ID: <54C0CFB5.909@igel.co.jp> References: <54C070DF.1050006@huawei.com> <20150122044531.GA13230@mhcomputing.net> <54C08B54.50700@huawei.com> <20150122073526.GA14800@mhcomputing.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: Linhaifeng Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150122073526.GA14800-Hv3ogNYU3JfZZajBQzqCxQ@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" On 2015/01/22 16:35, Matthew Hall wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 01:32:04PM +0800, Linhaifeng wrote: >> Do you mean if call rte_memcpy before rte_eal_init() would crash?why? > No guarantee. But a theory. It might use some things from the EAL init = to=20 > figure out which version of the accelerated algorithm to use. This selection is done at compile-time. And if the size is constant, I guess DPDK assumes memcpy is replaced by inline __builtin_memcpy. I haven't checked the performance of builtin memcpy, but probably much faster. Tetsuya > Matthew.