From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (mail-pa0-f43.google.com [209.85.220.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E652946 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:24:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id cy9so19701002pac.0 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:24:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XXdbq6iqxO9ZmN1e1RhtwTs2jZMIkCOMLLgNKzjw7QQ=; b=oKl9eSdLUVMNSAkPhq5IawVKoF9SPCrPrivWFmeArAWUWxLCv4U8OLN6mFjKHUXJ84 EXwdga/uC4Wq48KU2Om2FdYPEth61ac3laRVPLWKFNvjfQ3EQWYgqfM0GSJtliQejVX7 kVLIhck0Fgj0LaF/SMUWIp2fz9BfkIHSJn0lmoyiXxWszerO3wNvDIsiJ60wYpVB6b3u 4AcmYVB6hGHyinkTrTyzCk1+86qDFs01y1eo4wrRE58gOjGOOU6KKQr1i/qLlK1RHoVj OKUFxBF9yZQ63waQ3hVsqBcqTeMmnuDJZUC6tIAZj8W0UJeC75ZHLJO/mXXUAs61A0SC QgXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XXdbq6iqxO9ZmN1e1RhtwTs2jZMIkCOMLLgNKzjw7QQ=; b=PEqXkUefGHUJcTPU54afjDzLGC8p9I5A/bLsK/9xPkBR35D6rK7Grw/MQWMp4MV54c +Az2TYFtSnXD0If2TzLPmBIsyxp+nnOHHpcwggbUK0giddyVEOHt+PmFcTi0fi1G3SyT vwqr2af7BLEJDKaSBw7BlTxzyU2z8yB/Nfz3Oe4Y+Ro6d11yzYsll2GU6dtrldyRp14Q rXlWNREr9XqT64Qy5VQUx+lac6Yrfp3//sT0+joGylFdXnKLo1HaXHlLJybX1cqRIHz9 rXkX/MInKjRUmBrRTR1xZorxRdRTfncWk8j8kxlQmBm4LRv628T+GTvk7Y/aFSCs5Yl3 nnRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwP7Uxy7hNumEE26T9ASa04TtG2o4gY49YvwhmAjlVSJn4+omfJDTspKe43H0tjbUg== X-Received: by 10.66.9.42 with SMTP id w10mr17867805paa.34.1472657086895; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:24:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (static-50-53-69-251.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.69.251]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s89sm510937pfi.83.2016.08.31.08.24.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:24:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:24:56 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Vladyslav Buslov Cc: , Message-ID: <20160831082456.21423b42@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <20160816140128.10149-1-vladyslav.buslov@harmonicinc.com> References: <20160816140128.10149-1-vladyslav.buslov@harmonicinc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Performance optimization of ACL build process X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 15:24:48 -0000 On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 17:01:27 +0300 Vladyslav Buslov wrote: > Hello, > > In our application we need to be able to allocate tens of thousands of ACLs at runtime. > Testing revealed significant performance problems. We were able to track them to memset in calloc function which caused multiple page walks per invocation. > Modifying tb_mem to use huge page memory resulted ~2x performance gain for that operation. > > Regards, > Vladyslav > > Vladyslav Buslov (1): > acl: use rte_calloc for temporary memory allocation > > lib/librte_acl/tb_mem.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > What about making sure that the ACL code does it's own initialization of all fields and just use malloc rather than calloc?