DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Barbette <barbette@kth.se>
To: David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Performance impact of "declaring" more CPU cores
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 17:20:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1572456054835.87000@kth.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f061d171-b9d5-eabd-6868-0169a5f7eace@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Thanks for your comment. The raw number of cache misses is just higher almost in every function. While hwloc is indeed useful, the assignation is exactly the same in all cases. What we do is to define with "-l" more or less *unused* cores. But the used ones run at the same place, with the same resources and the same configuration.

The only thing that may change is what DPDK does with those unused cores. Eg, allocate more unused per-core caches, etc. Shifting the allocation of other caches, buffers, etc for the used cores, leading to more "unlucky" alignment and more contention.

I'm trying to reproduce with the smallest possible modification of testpmd so other people might experience this.

Thanks,

Tom                                
________________________________________
De : David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Envoyé : vendredi 25 octobre 2019 19:35
À : Tom Barbette; dev@dpdk.org
Objet : Re: [dpdk-dev] Performance impact of "declaring" more CPU cores

> The only useful observation we made is that when we are in a "bad case",
> the LLC has more cache misses.

Have you looked closely at the CPU topology on your platform, can you
provide some examples here of what you're seeing?  The hwloc package is
very useful in visualizing how your logical cores map to CPU cache.
There may be benefit is more strategically selecting the lcores you use
to reduce LLC cache mssies.

Dave

      reply	other threads:[~2019-10-30 17:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-24 17:32 Tom Barbette
2019-10-25 17:35 ` David Christensen
2019-10-30 17:20   ` Tom Barbette [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1572456054835.87000@kth.se \
    --to=barbette@kth.se \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).