From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E2A22BA1
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 8 Jun 2017 14:45:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id x70so76729232wme.0
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 08 Jun 2017 05:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=WgPudGTJyJtnuvYVGehIYAK2HGMhZefzAmLf0ER7nbg=;
b=Ou0eG3LkQm8bhqLGL9u43f+2aQfvWHFogUOQnauDl0OPPu3V1ombQwsl+XfXPgPFcJ
OIykf2seiGHC8u6tkQhWLNVaES8Jzq/5VB4g4az1ihQwxTDHsGDyeUvyxKjFRneK5iC5
1deZ1Vi9MV2tFwAO3XO3uJ79J5O0Hy4yFQaIfNk0/qDPTvKAhchruN/uBun6wdRDRNVJ
/D23j7WkkKEo7bam5yM10r3DTSuelgu95YcnTjiA4O9rBY/j8b2VW10Crf+GMP9ylzKm
NLE33o106UEa0jpJx8oZYWTggFTg77aU4F8snhMJ6AC4N9t25Qjj/IpvWf8gHC96ne8K
aPeA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=WgPudGTJyJtnuvYVGehIYAK2HGMhZefzAmLf0ER7nbg=;
b=qRPPr6A8HSAApbSrMbkNbllkXTa/oA9sR32VwRbJYqgoX/4KkdG8sDdAKoaci7bHms
pxCC/A1nFJimnxsrDjGLFheP8hw8pH3vE/LMLDoyau0gxiDUpzc3Zu58Dbe3ntjJAtO2
wG07yEV1lWiCnwIqJoLI9nH7SwlF3lYOGZan6R0AlptlnCViW+mJV/4mk7zbAIwjy2wI
ICwrDVp69U/rtUMDzE3UNlQ8g2B+/0ls+SdPLqTnJgYV9qeHfP8ncM2Xak9OUH2N+XSb
5deMQKinMDqqx6lyCVHYYVBUd3HEoZMVdwXMiXT4vNoBLBEfCTy+C+wqcuMHq3a3mLyq
WlMw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCwE+pFdWDkkf/R7xuOD4+GGbbBMUsY2DBYM6VnMjDv/MpFT2tP
ijlEblhzqQ0chXDv
X-Received: by 10.28.178.198 with SMTP id b189mr3328485wmf.8.1496925942764;
Thu, 08 Jun 2017 05:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from platinum (2a01cb0c03c651000226b0fffeed02fc.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb0c:3c6:5100:226:b0ff:feed:2fc])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l93sm6295492wrc.46.2017.06.08.05.45.42
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256);
Thu, 08 Jun 2017 05:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 14:45:40 +0200
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "Verkamp, Daniel"
<daniel.verkamp@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Message-ID: <20170608144540.5a8e3603@platinum>
In-Reply-To: <20170606145628.GB55760@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20170602200337.50743-1-daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
<20170602201213.51143-1-daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
<2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FB05190@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
<A5F28D4A728A7E41839CDC5C3B5A01E87EA1B586@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com>
<2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FB05216@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
<A5F28D4A728A7E41839CDC5C3B5A01E87EA1CBE9@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com>
<2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FB060FD@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
<20170606124201.GA43772@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
<2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FB0644D@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
<20170606145628.GB55760@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ring: use aligned memzone allocation
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 12:45:43 -0000
On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:56:28 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 02:19:21PM +0100, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 1:42 PM
> > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Verkamp, Daniel <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ring: use aligned memzone allocation
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 10:59:59AM +0100, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The PROD/CONS_ALIGN values on x86-64 are set to 2 cache lines, so members
> > > > > > of struct rte_ring are 128 byte aligned,
> > > > > > >and therefore the whole struct needs 128-byte alignment according to the ABI
> > > > > > so that the 128-byte alignment of the fields can be guaranteed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ah ok, missed the fact that rte_ring is 128B aligned these days.
> > > > > > BTW, I probably missed the initial discussion, but what was the reason for that?
> > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know why PROD_ALIGN/CONS_ALIGN use 128 byte alignment; it seems unnecessary if the cache line is only 64 bytes. An
> > > alternate
> > > > > fix would be to just use cache line alignment for these fields (since memzones are already cache line aligned).
> > > >
> > > > Yes, had the same thought.
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe there is some deeper reason for the >= 128-byte alignment logic in rte_ring.h?
> > > >
> > > > Might be, would be good to hear opinion the author of that change.
> > >
> > > It gives improved performance for core-2-core transfer.
> >
> > You mean empty cache-line(s) after prod/cons, correct?
> > That's ok but why we can't keep them and whole rte_ring aligned on cache-line boundaries?
> > Something like that:
> > struct rte_ring {
> > ...
> > struct rte_ring_headtail prod __rte_cache_aligned;
> > EMPTY_CACHE_LINE __rte_cache_aligned;
> > struct rte_ring_headtail cons __rte_cache_aligned;
> > EMPTY_CACHE_LINE __rte_cache_aligned;
> > };
> >
> > Konstantin
>
> Sure. That should probably work too.
>
> /Bruce
I also agree with Konstantin's proposal. One question though: since it
changes the alignment constraint of the rte_ring structure, I think it is
an ABI breakage: a structure including the rte_ring structure inherits
from this constraint.
How could we handle that, knowing this is probably a rare case?