sing 2nd cacheline in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 12:12 PM
> > To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Cc: Yongseok Koh ; Olivier Matz
> > ; dev@dpdk.org
> > Su
> -Original Message-
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 12:12 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: Yongseok Koh ; Olivier Matz ;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Accessing 2nd cacheline in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
>
> On
ier Matz
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Accessing 2nd cacheline in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> >
> > Hi Yongseok,
> >
> > > > On Feb 13, 2018, at 2:45 PM, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Olivier
> > > >
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:48 AM
> To: Yongseok Koh ; Olivier Matz
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Accessing 2nd cacheline in rte_pktmbuf_pre
Hi Yongseok,
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 2:45 PM, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> >
> > Hi Olivier
> >
> > I'm wondering why rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() checks m->next instead of
> > m->nb_segs? As 'next' is in the 2nd cacheline, checking nb_segs seems
> > beneficial
> > to the cases where almost mbufs have sin
> On Feb 13, 2018, at 2:45 PM, Yongseok Koh wrote:
>
> Hi Olivier
>
> I'm wondering why rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() checks m->next instead of
> m->nb_segs? As 'next' is in the 2nd cacheline, checking nb_segs seems
> beneficial
> to the cases where almost mbufs have single segment.
>
> A customer
Hi Olivier
I'm wondering why rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() checks m->next instead of
m->nb_segs? As 'next' is in the 2nd cacheline, checking nb_segs seems beneficial
to the cases where almost mbufs have single segment.
A customer reported high rate of cache misses in the code and I thought the
follow
7 matches
Mail list logo
