From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCCA4C433DB for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 16:31:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B8764EF9 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 16:31:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 47B8764EF9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-bounces@dpdk.org Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF7122A2D5; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 17:31:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C869640041 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 17:31:38 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: w1ETyJFQJrPcWZSone6vMmBP6jQIM+0z3Hd1kjybp1GyAz2veYVs/jNtZfYa9oDTXHrVr7+RoA uW4Ey4HEIUfw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9910"; a="173650022" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,215,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="173650022" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Mar 2021 08:31:36 -0800 IronPort-SDR: Cf3BVhF40TM32ms6+oq5rRZ221e9cHnhygCzhIztsriU3x/s0EdqiVaQhTAMGrZBzj7E4h3mhM lj933jUQ6X+A== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,215,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="397809890" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.216.186]) ([10.213.216.186]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Mar 2021 08:31:35 -0800 To: Ciara Loftus , dev@dpdk.org References: <20210218092307.29575-1-ciara.loftus@intel.com> <20210224111852.11947-1-ciara.loftus@intel.com> <20210224111852.11947-2-ciara.loftus@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit X-User: ferruhy Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2021 16:31:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210224111852.11947-2-ciara.loftus@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] net/af_xdp: Increase max batch size to 512 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 2/24/2021 11:18 AM, Ciara Loftus wrote: > Prior to this the max size was 32 which was unnecessarily > small. Can you please describe the impact? Why changed from 32 to 512? I assume this is to improve the performance but can you please explicitly document it in the commit log? > Also enforce the max batch size for TX for both > copy and zero copy modes. Prior to this only copy mode > enforced the max size. > By enforcing, the PMD ignores the user provided burst value if it is more than PMS supported MAX, and this ignoring is done in silent. Also there is no way to discover this MAX value without checking the code. Overall, why this max values are required at all? After quick check I can see they are used for some bulk operations, which I assume can be eliminated, what do you think? > Signed-off-by: Ciara Loftus <...>