2014-12-05 19:03, Jean-Mickael Guerin: > On 05/12/2014 18:07, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > From: Jean-Mickael Guerin [mailto:jean-mickael.guerin at 6wind.com] > >> On 05/12/2014 16:20, Konstantin Ananyev wrote: > >>> That's an alternative way to fix the problem described in the patch: > >>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-December/009394.html. > >>> The main difference is: > >>> - move buf_len fields out of rearm_data marker. > >>> - make ixgbe_recv_pkts_vec() not touch buf_len field at all > >>> (as all other RX functions behave). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com> > >> > >> The patch introduces writes on unaligned data, but we can assume no > >> performance penalty on intel hw, correct? > > > > Yes to both: > > it introduces 64bit unaligned store. > > I run performance test on IVB board, didn't see any degradation. > > Konstantin > > OK fine by me: > > Acked-by: Jean-Mickael Guerin <jean-mickael.guerin at 6wind.com>
Applied, even if the patch is RFC, it will be validated as part of -rc3. Thanks -- Thomas
