From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier Matz Subject: Re: [PATCH] mbuf: replace c memcpy code semantics with optimized rte_memcpy Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:02:10 +0200 Message-ID: <576D5982.1060302@6wind.com> References: <1464101442-10501-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> <57446C63.4040605@6wind.com> <20160524151654.GA10870@localhost.localdomain> <576D5837.3060907@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com To: "Hunt, David" , Jerin Jacob Return-path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63141C678 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:02:20 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <576D5837.3060907@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Dave, On 06/24/2016 05:56 PM, Hunt, David wrote: > Hi Jerin, > > I just ran a couple of tests on this patch on the latest master head on > a couple of machines. An older quad socket E5-4650 and a quad socket > E5-2699 v3 > > E5-4650: > I'm seeing a gain of 2% for un-cached tests and a gain of 9% on the > cached tests. > > E5-2699 v3: > I'm seeing a loss of 0.1% for un-cached tests and a gain of 11% on the > cached tests. > > This is purely the autotest comparison, I don't have traffic generator > results. But based on the above, I don't think there are any performance > issues with the patch. > Thanks for doing the test on your side. I think it's probably enough to integrate Jerin's patch . About using a rte_memcpy() in the mempool_get(), I don't think I'll have the time to do a more exhaustive test before the 16.07, so I'll come back with it later. I'm sending an ack on the v2 thread.