Re: [PATCH] eal/x86: improve rte_memcpy const size 16 performance

2024-03-03 Thread Stephen Hemminger
Another option would be to just do what PPC already does. The ENA part is because it has some garbage trying to use memcpy always (which is one of those bad ideas). From 74e7ab929e61e0481f6e0214d4d06a716b2f7d79 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Stephen Hemminger Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2024 08:02:07 -0800

RE: [PATCH] eal/x86: improve rte_memcpy const size 16 performance

2024-03-03 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:step...@networkplumber.org] > Sent: Sunday, 3 March 2024 06.58 > > On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 21:40:03 -0800 > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 00:48:12 +0100 > > Morten Brørup wrote: > > > > > When the rte_memcpy() size is 16, the same 16 bytes are c

Re: [PATCH] eal/x86: improve rte_memcpy const size 16 performance

2024-03-02 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 21:40:03 -0800 Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 00:48:12 +0100 > Morten Brørup wrote: > > > When the rte_memcpy() size is 16, the same 16 bytes are copied twice. > > In the case where the size is knownto be 16 at build tine, omit the > > duplicate copy. > > > >

Re: [PATCH] eal/x86: improve rte_memcpy const size 16 performance

2024-03-02 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 00:48:12 +0100 Morten Brørup wrote: > When the rte_memcpy() size is 16, the same 16 bytes are copied twice. > In the case where the size is knownto be 16 at build tine, omit the > duplicate copy. > > Reduced the amount of effectively copy-pasted code by using #ifdef > inside

RE: [PATCH] eal/x86: improve rte_memcpy const size 16 performance

2024-03-02 Thread Morten Brørup
Recheck-request: iol-broadcom-Performance Patch only modifies x86 code, but fails performance on aarch64.