> -----Original Message----- > From: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 12:44 AM > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>; > Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; David Christensen > <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; > Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Ruifeng Wang > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; n...@arm.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli > <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; Thomas Monjalon > <tho...@monjalon.net>; David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] net/i40e: remove redundant number of packets check > > On 3/3/2022 2:28 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 9:54 AM > >> To: Xing, Beilei <beilei.x...@intel.com>; David Christensen > >> <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Richardson, Bruce > >> <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin > >> <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; n...@arm.com; Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>; > >> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> > >> Subject: [PATCH v1] net/i40e: remove redundant number of packets > >> check > >> > >> For i40e_xmit_pkts_vec_xx function, it checks nb_pkts to ensure > >> nb_pkts does not cross rs_thresh. > >> > >> However, in i40e_xmit_fixed_burst_vec_xx function, this check will be > >> performed again. To improve code, delete this redundant check. > >> > >> Suggested-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> > > > > Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel. > > > > Hi Qi, > > This patch is not acked by the i40e maintainers. > > And this is changing the datapath for the -rc3, two weeks before the release. > Is > it tested enough? > > What is the gain with this patch, I don't see any numbers in the commit log. > If the gain is small, can we postpone this patch to next release instead of > getting > it for -rc3?
The patch applied the same thing as below which I have reviewed. https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220222224818.8612-1-kathleen.cape...@arm.com/ I didn't see the risk of having it, and I will add a "reviewed-by" to avoid confusion, but if you think it's risky, we can still defer it to next-net. Thanks Qi
