Hi Thomas,

On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:47:34AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

What's the follow-up for this patch?

Unfortunatly, I still don't have the time to work on this topic yet.

In my initial tests, in our lab, I didn't notice any performance
regression, but Ali has seen an impact (0.5M PPS, but I don't know how
much in percent).

19/01/2021 15:04, Slava Ovsiienko:

quoted

Hi, All

Could we postpose this patch at least to rc2? We would like to conduct more investigations?

With best regards, Slava

From: Olivier Matz <redacted>

quoted

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 05:52:32PM +0000, Ali Alnubani wrote:

quoted

Hi,
(Sorry had to resend this to some recipients due to mail server problems).

Just confirming that I can still reproduce the regression with single core and

64B frames on other servers.

Many thanks for the feedback. Can you please detail what is the amount of
performance loss in percent, and confirm the test case? (I suppose it is
testpmd io forward).

Unfortunatly, I won't be able to spend a lot of time on this soon (sorry for
that). So I see at least these 2 options:

- postpone the patch again, until I can find more time to analyze
  and optimize
- apply the patch if the performance loss is acceptable compared to
  the added value of fixing a bug

[...]

Statu quo...

Olivier

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

Assuming that pw86457 doesn't have an effect on this test, it looks
to me that this patch caused a regression in Intel hardware as well.

Can someone update the baseline's expected values for the Intel NICs
and rerun the test on this patch?

Thanks,
Ali