[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/lpm: remove unnecessary inline

[Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)]

Hi Vladimir,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Medvedkin, Vladimir <vladimir.medvedkin at intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 20:51
> To: Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China) <Ruifeng.Wang at arm.com>;
> bruce.richardson at intel.com
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com>; Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
> <Gavin.Hu at arm.com>; nd <nd at arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/lpm: remove unnecessary inline
> 
> Hi Wang,
> 
> 1. It is better to explicitly use __rte_noinline with this function because my
> gcc still inlines it even without the inline qualifier.
> 
> 2. The same should be applied to _v20 functions.
> 
> 3. Please try running the tests again and show the results.
For x86, I can do test with E5 platform that we have.  

> 
> 4. Make this patch the first in a series.
> 

Thanks. Will come back with new patch set.

> On 19/06/2019 06:36, Ruifeng Wang wrote:
> > Tests showed that the 'inline' keyword caused performance drop on some
> > x86 platforms after the memory ordering patches applied.
> > By removing the 'inline' keyword, the performance was recovered as
> > before on x86 and no impact to arm64 platforms.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Medvedkin Vladimir <vladimir.medvedkin at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang at arm.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu at arm.com>
> > ---
> > v2: initail version to recover rte_lpm_add() performance
> >
> >   lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 4 ++--
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c index
> > 0addff5d4..c97b602e6 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> > @@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ add_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm,
> uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> >
> > -static inline int32_t
> > +static int32_t
> >   add_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth,
> >   		uint32_t next_hop)
> >   {
> > @@ -975,7 +975,7 @@ add_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm,
> uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth,
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> >
> > -static inline int32_t
> > +static int32_t
> >   add_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t
> depth,
> >   		uint32_t next_hop)
> >   {
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Vladimir