> From: Konstantin Ananyev [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, 31 August 2026 10.50 > > > Added a new high-performance lock-free "pile", using the Stack API. > > The pile behaves roughly like a stack, but is not strictly LIFO. > > > > The pile is optimized for pushing/popping bulks of objects, which > > it does significantly faster than the lock-free stack. > > > > Pushing/popping a number of objects not divisible by the compile time > > configurable bulk size is handled gracefully, but not as fast as > > complete bulks. > > > > Performance examples, stack_pile_perf_autotest vs. stack_lf_autotest: > > > > On a single core, pushing/popping 1 or 8 objects is similar speed. > > On a single core, pushing/popping 32 objects is 2x faster. > > On a single core, pushing/popping 512 objects is 10x faster. > > > > On four cores, pushing/popping 1, 8 or 32 objects is slightly faster. > > On four cores, pushing/popping 512 objects is 4x faster. > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <[email protected]> > > The code itself looks ok to me, thought I still think it is worth to > consider > moving lf_pile (and lf_stack) DP implementation in .c, to avoid each > rte_stack_pus/pop > to inline all three of them.
If a use case knows the selected stack implement at build time, it can call the implementation's push/pop functions directly. I updated the mempool stack driver v3 patch [1] to do this for all three stack implementations. [1]: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/[email protected]/ > My speculation is that the perf diff for bulk enqueue/dequeue because > of > that would be negligible, while both are quite big for inlining them > always > (specially lf_pile). If the number of objects being pushed/popped is known at build time, the compiler can optimize the functions when inlined. I tried experimented with conditional inlining depending on the number of objects being known at build time, but I wasn't really pleased with it.
