On 01/30/2017 02:30 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:26:41PM +0100, Michal Orsák wrote:
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.
Ok, I will send you results when I have them.
Again, no reply yet. I'm appying them to dpdk-next-virtio. I really
don't think it could perform worse in ARM, as it removes a costly
cache invalidation operation (which should be more expensive than the
instruction cycles).
OTOH, again, testing is welcome, if it's later proved to be worse on
ARM (which I highly doubt), I could revert them.
Or have a per-architecture definition of ASSIGN_UNLESS_EQUAL if it
proved to regress on ARM?
Maxime
--yliu
