Hi Jerin, > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:11 PM Konstantin Ananyev > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > As was discussed here: > > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-February/158586.html > > this RFC aimed to hide ring internals into .c and make all > > ring functions non-inlined. In theory that might help to > > maintain ABI stability in future. > > This is just a POC to measure the impact of proposed idea, > > proper implementation would definetly need some extra effort. > > On IA box (SKX) ring_perf_autotest shows ~20-30 cycles extra for > > enqueue+dequeue pair. On some more realistic code, I suspect > > the impact it might be a bit higher. > > For MP/MC bulk transfers degradation seems quite small, > > though for SP/SC and/or small transfers it is more then noticable > > (see exact numbers below). > > From my perspective we'd probably keep it inlined for now > > to avoid any non-anticipated perfomance degradations. > > Though intersted to see perf results and opinions from > > other interested parties. > > +1 > > My reasoning is a bit different, DPDK is using in embedded boxes too > where performance has > more weight than ABI stuff. I think we need to focus first on slow > path APIs ABI stuff. > > I spend a few cycles to apply this patch + > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-February/158586.html > on top of the tree, there are a lot of conflicts. If I get a mergeable > patch then I will test it on an arm64 box.
You don’t need to apply previous patch series. They are completely unrelated. Just apply that one (http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/66982/) on top of dpdk.org master. It should be applied cleanly (at least it does for me). Konstantin > > > > > > > > > Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8160 CPU @ 2.10GHz > > ring_perf_autotest (without patch/with patch)
