[dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 1/15/2021 6:39 PM, Ali Alnubani wrote:
> Hi,
> Adding Ferruh and Zhaoyan,
> 
>> Ali,
>>
>> You reported some performance regression, did you confirm it?
>> If I get no reply by monday, I'll proceed with this patch.
> 
> Sure I'll confirm by Monday.
> 
> Doesn't the regression also reproduce on the Lab's Intel servers?
> Even though the check iol-intel-Performance isn't failing, I can see that the throughput differences from expected for this patch are less than those of another patch that was tested only 20 minutes earlier. Both patches were applied to the same tree:
> 
> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2021-January/173927.html
>> | 64         | 512     | 1.571                               |
> 
> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2021-January/173919.html
>> | 64         | 512     | 2.698                               |
> 
> Assuming that pw86457 doesn't have an effect on this test, it looks to me that this patch caused a regression in Intel hardware as well.
> 
> Can someone update the baseline's expected values for the Intel NICs and rerun the test on this patch?
> 

Zhaoyan said that the baseline is calculated dynamically,
what I understand is baseline set based on previous days performance result, so 
it shouldn't require updating.

But cc'ed the lab for more details.