On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 09:49:35 -0700 David Christensen <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Replacing memcpy() with rte_memcpy() improved 64 byte packet > performance by 33% on a POWER9 system and by 10% on an x86_64 > system. I see rte_memcpy was already used in the patch diff > Signed-off-by: David Christensen <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c > b/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c > index d17222c612..330c9c2fd6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c > +++ b/drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c > @@ -384,8 +384,8 @@ eth_memif_rx(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, > uint16_t nb_pkts) > rte_pktmbuf_pkt_len(mbuf_head) += cp_len; > > rte_memcpy(rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(mbuf, void *, > dst_off), > - (uint8_t *)memif_get_buffer(proc_private, d0) + > src_off, > - cp_len); > + (uint8_t *)memif_get_buffer(proc_private, d0) > + + src_off, cp_len); This just changes line break for no good reason. > > src_off += cp_len; > dst_off += cp_len; > @@ -644,7 +644,8 @@ eth_memif_tx(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, > uint16_t nb_pkts) > } > cp_len = RTE_MIN(dst_len, src_len); > > - rte_memcpy((uint8_t *)memif_get_buffer(proc_private, > d0) + dst_off, > + rte_memcpy((uint8_t *) > + memif_get_buffer(proc_private, d0) + dst_off, > rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(mbuf, void *, src_off), > cp_len); > ditto. Look like this patch is confused, the description does not match the code.
