Re: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-06-08 Thread Thomas Monjalon
30/03/2025 10:09, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 3/27/25 20:15, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > >> The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY are > >> equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer bytes of code space. >

Re: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-03-30 Thread Andrew Rybchenko
On 3/27/25 20:15, Bruce Richardson wrote: On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY are equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer bytes of code space. Similarly for lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_i

RE: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-03-27 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2025 18.16 > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > > The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY > are > > equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer byt

Re: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-03-27 Thread Bruce Richardson
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY are > equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer bytes of code space. > Similarly for lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id == LCORE_ID_ANY. > > The rte_mempool

RE: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-03-25 Thread Morten Brørup
PING for review. @Bruce, you seemed to acknowledge this, but never sent a formal Ack. Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards, -Morten Brørup > -Original Message- > From: Morten Brørup [mailto:m...@smartsharesystems.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 26 February 2025 16.59 > To: Andrew Rybchenko; dev@dpdk

RE: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-03-02 Thread Morten Brørup
> > > Is there any measurable performance change with these > modifications? > > > > It varies. > > Here are some of the good ones, tested on a VM under VMware: > > > > mempool_autotest cache=512 cores=1 > > n_get_bulk=64 n_put_bulk=64 n_keep=128 constant_n=0 > > rate_persec=1309408130 -> 141706788

Re: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-02-27 Thread Bruce Richardson
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 10:14:27AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote: > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, 26 February 2025 17.53 > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > > > The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_

RE: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-02-27 Thread Morten Brørup
> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 26 February 2025 17.53 > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > > The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY > are > > equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer

Re: [PATCH] mempool: micro optimizations

2025-02-26 Thread Bruce Richardson
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:59:22PM +, Morten Brørup wrote: > The comparisons lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id != LCORE_ID_ANY are > equivalent, but the latter compiles to fewer bytes of code space. > Similarly for lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE and lcore_id == LCORE_ID_ANY. > > The rte_mempool