On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:09 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I ran the "xdp_rxq_info" sample with and without Sami's patch: > > Thanks for doing this! Yes, thanks for testing this Björn! > Or (1/22998700 - 1/23923874) * 10**9 == 1.7 nanoseconds of overhead. > > I guess that is not *too* bad; but it's still chipping away at > performance; anything we could do to lower the overhead? The check is already rather minimal, but I could move this to a static inline function to help ensure the compiler doesn't generate an additional function call for this. I'm also fine with gating this behind a separate config option, but I'm not sure if that's worth it. Any thoughts? Sami
