> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz > Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:49 PM > > We should keep in mind that today we have the seqn field but it is not > used by any PMD. In case it is implemented, would it be a per-queue > sequence number? Is it useful from an application view? > > This field is only used by the librte_reorder library, and in my > opinion, we should consider moving it in the second cache line since it > is not filled by the PMD.
+1 because it is not filled by the NIC HW or PMD. If our argument is "better performance", I would prefer having the generic 64 bit m->userdata in cacheline0 than m->seqn.
