> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Morten Brørup
> Sent: Thursday, 27 May 2021 20.15
>
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> > Sent: Thursday, 27 May 2021 19.22
> >
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:39:59PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
> > >
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> Sent: Thursday, 27 May 2021 19.22
>
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:39:59PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
> >For the case I have, hardly 2% of the data buffers which are being
> >copied get looked at - mostly its for DMA.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:39:59PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
>For the case I have, hardly 2% of the data buffers which are being
>copied get looked at - mostly its for DMA. Having a version of DPDK
>memcopy that does non temporal copies would definitely be good.
>If in my case, I
For the case I have, hardly 2% of the data buffers which are being copied
get looked at - mostly its for DMA. Having a version of DPDK memcopy that
does non temporal copies would definitely be good.
If in my case, I have a lot of CPUs doing the copy in parallel, would I/OAT
driver copy accelerator
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 05:49:19PM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> > Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2021 11.20
> >
> > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:43:24PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
> > > I am looking at the source for rte_memcpy (this
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2021 11.20
>
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:43:24PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
> > I am looking at the source for rte_memcpy (this is a discussion only
> > for x86-64)
> >
> > For one of the cases, when
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:43:24PM +0530, Manish Sharma wrote:
> I am looking at the source for rte_memcpy (this is a discussion only for
> x86-64)
>
> For one of the cases, when aligned correctly, it uses
>
> /**
> * Copy 64 bytes from one location to another,
> * locations should not overlap.
I am looking at the source for rte_memcpy (this is a discussion only for
x86-64)
For one of the cases, when aligned correctly, it uses
/**
* Copy 64 bytes from one location to another,
* locations should not overlap.
*/
static __rte_always_inline void
rte_mov64(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src
I am looking at the source for rte_memcpy (this is a discussion only for
x64-64)
For one of the cases, when aligned correctly, it uses
/**
* Copy 64 bytes from one location to another,
* locations should not overlap.
*/
static __rte_always_inline void
rte_mov64(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src
> On Sep 12, 2018, at 1:56 PM, Yongseok Koh wrote:
>
> Hi, Christian
>
> We've recently encountered a weird issue with Ubuntu 18.04 on the Skylake
> server. I can always reproduce this crash and I could narrowed it down. I
> guess
> it could be a GCC issue.
>
>
> [1] How to reproduce
> - Conn
Hi, Christian
We've recently encountered a weird issue with Ubuntu 18.04 on the Skylake
server. I can always reproduce this crash and I could narrowed it down. I guess
it could be a GCC issue.
[1] How to reproduce
- ConnectX-4Lx/ConnectX-5 with mlx5 PMD in DPDK 18.02.1
- Ubuntu 18.04 on Intel Sk
/ark.intel.com/products/37147/Intel-Core-i7-920-Processor-8M-Cache-2_66-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI
Regards,
/Bruce
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:13 PM
> To: Vithal S Mohare
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
6 xtpr popcnt lahf_lm
>
> Thanks,
> -Vithal
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:13 PM
> To: Vithal S Mohare
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy optimization patch to
orman [mailto:nhor...@tuxdriver.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:13 PM
To: Vithal S Mohare
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy optimization patch to dpdk ver 1.7
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 04:09:25AM +, Vithal S Mohare wrote:
> Ok, crash, as expected. So, now dpdk mandate
, I think.
Neil
> Thanks,
> -Vithal
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 6:32 PM
> To: Vithal S Mohare
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy optimization patch to dpdk
at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy optimization patch to dpdk ver 1.7
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:39:22AM +, Vithal S Mohare wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to use rte_memcpy optimization patch along with dpdk version 1.7.
> With the patch, while dpdk itself is compiled,
Hi,
I am trying to use rte_memcpy optimization patch along with dpdk version 1.7.
With the patch, while dpdk itself is compiled, applications failed with below
error:
---
include/rte_memcpy.h:629:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'_mm_alignr_epi8' [-Werror=
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:39:22AM +, Vithal S Mohare wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to use rte_memcpy optimization patch along with dpdk version 1.7.
> With the patch, while dpdk itself is compiled, applications failed with
> below error:
> ---
> include/rte_memcp
18 matches
Mail list logo
