2016-10-07 14:10 GMT-07:00 Jarno Rajahalme <ja...@ovn.org>: > > > On Oct 7, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Bhanuprakash Bodireddy < > bhanuprakash.bodire...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Aligning the 'keys' array seems to positively impact performance. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bhanuprakash Bodireddy <bhanuprakash.bodire...@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Antonio Fischetti <antonio.fische...@intel.com> > > --- > > lib/dpif-netdev.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/dpif-netdev.c b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > index d0bb191..dfc9cbd 100644 > > --- a/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > +++ b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > @@ -4157,7 +4157,7 @@ dp_netdev_input__(struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread *pmd, > > /* Sparse or MSVC doesn't like variable length array. */ > > enum { PKT_ARRAY_SIZE = NETDEV_MAX_BURST }; > > #endif > > - struct netdev_flow_key keys[PKT_ARRAY_SIZE]; > > + struct netdev_flow_key keys[PKT_ARRAY_SIZE] > __attribute__((aligned(64))); > > Due to compiler compatibility you must use OVS_ALIGNED_VAR(64) instead. >
I would also use the CACHE_LINE_SIZE define, instead of 64 Thanks, Daniele > > struct packet_batch_per_flow batches[PKT_ARRAY_SIZE]; > > long long now = time_msec(); > > size_t newcnt, n_batches, i; > > -- > > 2.4.11 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > dev@openvswitch.org > > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openvswitch.org > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev