<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:50 PM Bruce Richardson <<a href="mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com">bruce.richardson@intel.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 02:29:28PM +0500, Khadem Ullah wrote:<br>
> Hi Bruce,<br>
> Thanks for the feedback!<br>
<br>
No problem. <br>
BTW: Please don't top-post in replying - it's best practice to put<br>
the reply below the text you are replying to. Thanks.<br><br></blockquote><div><div><div>Ohh, I got it :) <br></div>I was trimming the quotes when replying but in top-post format, <br></div>I will always try to avoid a top-post reply in future! <br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">AVX2 was first available in systems starting in 2013, (and AMD systems<br>
since 2015), so at this point it's been around a long time. The SSE code<br>
paths in the drivers will only be used by systems which do not have AVX2 on<br>
them - which should be relatively rare, I hope, at this point. There are no<br>
features in the SSE driver that are not available in the AVX2 one, so, I'm<br>
not aware of any reason why one would need to use the SSE code path in a<br>
deployment of DPDK</blockquote><div> <div>Yes, I think all features in SSE do already exist in AVX2 paths. </div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Even without this patch, there will be no features added to the SSE code<br>
paths in the drivers. Any new additions would just be to the AVX2 and<br>
AVX-512 code paths. Even for systems without AVX2, if the SSE path is<br>
removed the driver will fall-back to the scalar paths, which have far more<br>
features available in them than the SSE codepaths, which were simplified for<br>
performance reasons.<br>
<br>
/Bruce<br></blockquote></div><div><div>Thanks for the update. I could not exactly get the meaning of fall-back to the scalar path. <br>Does that mean <span><span dir="ltr">that the driver automatically switches to the scalar path ?<br>which is slower but includes all the necessary features that were simplified in the AVX2 path. </span></span> <br>I believe AVX2 provides an average performance much better for small frame or packet size (about 14 Gbps). <br><br></div><div>Please forget the previous email, some mess up with practicing not doing top-posts. <br>Hope this will be fine :)<br>Regards,<br></div><div>Khadem </div><br clear="all"></div><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix"> </span><br></div>