Hi Stephen, > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 23:25 > To: Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China) <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli <[email protected]>; > Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <[email protected]>; nd <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] lib/lpm: not inline unnecessary > functions > > On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:37:49 +0800 > Ruifeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Tests showed that the function inlining caused performance drop on > > some x86 platforms with the memory ordering patches applied. > > By force no-inline functions, the performance was better than before > > on x86 and no impact to arm64 platforms. > > > > Suggested-by: Medvedkin Vladimir <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <[email protected]> > { > > Do you actually need to force noinline or is just taking of inline enough? > In general, letting compiler decide is often best practice.
The force noinline is an optimization for x86 platforms to keep rte_lpm_add() API performance with memory ordering applied.
