> From: Kamalakshitha Aligeri [mailto:kamalakshitha.alig...@arm.com]
> Sent: Friday, 10 February 2023 07.54
>
> Integrated zero-copy put API in mempool cache in i40e PMD.
> On Ampere Altra server, l3fwd single core's performance improves by 5%
> with the new API
>
> Signed-off-by: Kamalakshitha Aligeri <kamalakshitha.alig...@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>
> ---
> Link:
> https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230209145833.129986-1-
> m...@smartsharesystems.com/
If you agree with the referred patch, please review or acknowledge it on the
mailing list, so it can be merged.
>
> .mailmap | 1 +
> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/.mailmap b/.mailmap
> index 75884b6fe2..05a42edbcf 100644
> --- a/.mailmap
> +++ b/.mailmap
> @@ -670,6 +670,7 @@ Kai Ji <kai...@intel.com>
> Kaiwen Deng <kaiwenx.d...@intel.com>
> Kalesh AP <kalesh-anakkur.pura...@broadcom.com>
> Kamalakannan R <kamalakanna...@intel.com>
> +Kamalakshitha Aligeri <kamalakshitha.alig...@arm.com>
> Kamil Bednarczyk <kamil.bednarc...@intel.com>
> Kamil Chalupnik <kamilx.chalup...@intel.com>
> Kamil Rytarowski <kamil.rytarow...@caviumnetworks.com>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
> b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
> index fe1a6ec75e..113599d82b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
> @@ -95,18 +95,36 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
>
> n = txq->tx_rs_thresh;
>
> - /* first buffer to free from S/W ring is at index
> - * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
> - */
> + /* first buffer to free from S/W ring is at index
> + * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
> + */
> txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
>
> if (txq->offloads & RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MBUF_FAST_FREE) {
> + struct rte_mempool *mp = txep[0].mbuf->pool;
> + struct rte_mempool_cache *cache =
> rte_mempool_default_cache(mp, rte_lcore_id());
> + void **cache_objs;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!cache))
> + goto fallback;
> +
> + cache_objs = rte_mempool_cache_zc_put_bulk(cache, mp, n);
> + if (unlikely(!cache_objs))
> + goto fallback;
> +
> for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
> - free[i] = txep[i].mbuf;
> + cache_objs[i] = txep->mbuf;
> /* no need to reset txep[i].mbuf in vector path */
> + txep++;
Why the change from "xyz[i] = txep[i].mbuf;" to "xyz[i] = txep->mbuf; txep++;"?
I don't see "txep" being used after the "done" label. And at the fallback, you
still use "xyz[i] = txep[i].mbuf;". It would look cleaner using the same method
in both places.
It's not important, so feel free to keep as is or change as suggested. Both
ways,
Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
> }
> - rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, n);
> goto done;
> +
> +fallback:
> + for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + free[i] = txep[i].mbuf;
> + rte_mempool_generic_put(mp, (void **)free, n, cache);
> + goto done;
> +
> }
>
> m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
> --
> 2.25.1
>
