On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:14:04PM +0100, Michal Orsák wrote:
> On 16.1.2017 12:12, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:05:04PM +0100, Michal Orsák wrote:
> >>On 16.1.2017 08:12, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 02:13:09PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >>>>But it's not the test methodology I'd expect. You are purely testing
> >>>>the instruction cycles. The drop on ARM is something more like "the
> >>>>if instruction takes more cycles than the simple assignment".
> >>>>
> >>>>This macro is used in the case that one process is heavily writing
> >>>>same value (0 here) again and again while another process is heavily
> >>>>read it also again and again. That means cache violation always
> >>>>happen. With this macro, however, this cache issue could be avoided,
> >>>>since no write happens.
> >>>>
> >>>>For such workload, I don't think it would behaviour worse on ARM.
> >>>No reply yet; I will treat it as no objections, and please shout out if
> >>>any.
> >>>
> >>>Both applied to dpdk-next-virtio.
> >>>
> >>> --yliu
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>
> >>currently I am running short of time. If you have any test prepared which i
> >>can just ran, please send me a link.
> >No link, but you could try:
> >
> >- a typical PVP test
> >
> >- a txonly test: running txonly fwd mode in guest PMD while running
> > rxonly in fwd mode.
> >
> >The second is a micro test, thus I saw way bigger boost.
> >
> >When are you available for the testing, btw?
> 25.1.2017+
Okay, I will hold on a while to apply them.
--yliu
