[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] rte_mbuf: scattered pktmbufs freeing optimization

Olivier MATZ olivier.matz at 6wind.com
Wed Mar 4 09:54:10 CET 2015


Hi Vadim,

On 02/27/2015 06:09 PM, Vadim Suraev wrote:
>  >Indeed, this function looks useful, and I also have a work in progress
>  >on this topic, but currently it is not well tested.
> I'm sorry, I didn't know. I'll not interfere with my patch))

That not what I wanted to say :)

You are very welcome with your patch, I just wanted to notify
that I am also working in the same area and that's why I listed
the things I'm currently working on.


>  >About the inlining, I have no objection now, although Stephen may be
>  >right. I think we can consider un-inline some functions, based on
>  >performance measurements.
> I've also noticed in many cases it makes no difference. Seems to be some
> trade-off.
>
>  >- clarify the difference between raw_alloc/raw_free and
>  >  mempool_get/mempool_put: For instance, I think that the reference
>  >  counter initialization should be managed by rte_pktmbuf_reset() like
>  >  the rest of the fields, therefore raw_alloc/raw_free could be replaced
> It looks useful to me since not all of the fields are used in every
> particular application so
> if the allocation is decoupled from reset, one can save some cycles.

Yes, this is also a trade-off between maintainability and speed, and
speed is probably the first constraint for the dpdk. But maybe we can
find an alternative that is both fast and maintainable.

Thanks,
Olivier



More information about the dev mailing list