On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bill Fischofer [mailto:bill.fischo...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2017 2:05 AM >> To: Petri Savolainen <petri.savolai...@linaro.org> >> Cc: lng-odp-forward <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> >> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 03/10] linux-gen: packet: packet handle is >> hdr pointer >> >> These are reasonable changes, but they conflict with the code in >> api-next so I suggest this series be rebased onto api-next and then >> moved to master as part of the next release (which should be later >> this month) to avoid a huge merge headache for Maxim. >> > > I suggest that we work the other way around. Fix the smaller delta (new > packet reference code) in api-next and continue the ABI work in master. This > handle as pointer enables performant inline functions. This patch set alone > increases e.g. l2fwd performance by 20%. Which is a lot compared to the > simplicity of the change. It also demonstrates the performance benefit of non > ABI compat mode (--disable-abi-compat). > > Also I think packet reference code needs a bit of development before it can > be merged to the master anyway. The "handle is pointer" change was actually > less painful than I expected, thanks to the usage of handle <-> pointer > conversion functions in the code base. Basically, we need to make sure that > all new code in api-next continue to use those conversion functions instead > of expecting particular handle implementation.
The bulk of the performance concerns you have with the packet reference code in api-next are already addressed with patch http://patches.opendataplane.org/patch/7879/ which is still awaiting your review. Currently we're bifurcating api-next and master and that isn't helping the goal of timely releases. Perhaps we should push out v1.14.0.0 sooner so that we can get back to a single code base to support ongoing work like this? > > -Petri >
