I get your point. I've also read throught the code of various PMDs and
have found no indication of setting l2_len/l3_len fields as well.
As for testing, we'd be happy to test the patchset but we are now in
process of building our testing facilities so we are not ready to
provide enough workload fo
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:00:12PM +0600, Yerden Zhumabekov wrote:
> I get your point. I've also read throught the code of various PMDs and
> have found no indication of setting l2_len/l3_len fields as well.
>
> As for testing, we'd be happy to test the patchset but we are now in
> process of buil
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:08:57AM +0600, Yerden Zhumabekov wrote:
> Hello Bruce,
>
> I'm a little bit concerned about performance issues that would arise if
> these fields would go to the 2nd cache line.
>
> For exampe, l2_len and l3_len fields are used by librte_ip_frag to find
> L3 and L4 head
Hello Bruce,
I'm a little bit concerned about performance issues that would arise if
these fields would go to the 2nd cache line.
For exampe, l2_len and l3_len fields are used by librte_ip_frag to find
L3 and L4 headers position inside mbuf data. Thus, these values should
be calculated by NIC off
The l2_len and l3_len fields are used for TX offloads and so should be
put on the second cache line, along with the other fields only used on
TX.
Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson
---
lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 6 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mb
5 matches
Mail list logo
