[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] eal/common: introduce rte_memset and related test

Yang, Zhiyong zhiyong.yang at intel.com
Wed Jan 18 03:42:19 CET 2017

hi, Thomas:
	Thanks for your reply.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 4:14 AM
> To: Yang, Zhiyong <zhiyong.yang at intel.com>
> Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; yuanhan.liu at linux.intel.com; De Lara
> Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] eal/common: introduce rte_memset
> and related test
> 2017-01-17 06:24, Yang, Zhiyong:
> > Hi, Thomas:
> > 	Does this patchset have chance to be applied for 1702 release?
> It could be part of 17.02 but there are some issues:
> The x86 part did not receive any ack from x86 maintainers.


> checkpatch reports some warnings, especially about counting elements of an
> array. Please use RTE_DIM.

Ok, I ignore these warning as reference to current release code. More clean code
will been sent in future.

> The file in generic/ is for doxygen only.
> Please check how it is done for other files.

Ok.  I don't know this before. :), thank you.

> The description is "Functions for vectorised implementation of memset()."
> Does it mean memset from glibc does not use vector instructions?

Sorry for causing misleading understanding,
Glibc memset() use vectorization instructions to implement optimization, of course.
I just want to say "the functions for implementing the same functionality
like glibc memset() ".  My bad English expressions.  :)

> The functional autotest is not integrated in the basic test suite.

I can run command line "memset_autotest",  It seems that I leave something out.

> I wish this kind of review would be done by someone else.
> As it has not a big performance impact, this series could wait the next release.

Maybe memset() consumes small ratio for current DPDK data path. 

> By the way, have you tried to work on glibc, as I had suggested?

I'm not familiar with glibc regulation, as far as I know, glibc is using X86 asm,
rather than intrinsic.  I will consider your suggestion. 


More information about the dev mailing list