From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f195.google.com (mail-pf0-f195.google.com [209.85.192.195]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77290E5D for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:02:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf0-f195.google.com with SMTP id f15so11234739pfn.0 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:02:27 -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=Gw3EDTB5N/Dt/fuhP/2W5XjjDRJuROwbbfN5Wk7SM6o=; b=n/G1/rEax7pK5FPCjU/4dcHyUxcoKMe258MgVnVNoj8iseK77mHD+RiNcHOxC4BLDt wtuDDP7T/HAGZnXqPBOc0TNPK7hp587OU+RE/vzjxqWzcYwjgUrCzyGwuXx5DI95ZvgS BIJuEWmpI0iOTR/E+C8dyQidBlO6uax81vrPP6rjjvlX5pu3deq5mNiRpVqp2zn1mKRM jeNT2ldoeV+KQaN6NflBBfyvwWvz7WzfSIr4SKnN+hKcTlY0QWrTEv6MV+b09OU6ZVx5 7u8yLgdf4FlksafY71gb6ZQ4WoXQwcOJhWESxsN8qyYF5SwW1RAo5B7xZfi624AT7g53 8Maw== 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=Gw3EDTB5N/Dt/fuhP/2W5XjjDRJuROwbbfN5Wk7SM6o=; b=X6WsBq6oW9GUWigh5h/oqBz+xhL6WfNu+mB6es+PaA0zrrYlfRhx/0WaoeL7KJ6hxb 5lHvGddhT0mQbwmTKnvCUlDINE3+nOkjkepJ68m3SOSLUlNLyO/yEwjQs5W2qBDw5LG7 OtqnQoWI+0JghzUWnMxSxaDxX9HY6lr+yzpOgxZIbw7Z/RS926ecM+EJltv2mILYva3I T0wX2VZUnVKsXj8li0sGq6XNXv2QVfcKt7nT6eWBMCvp0ESMaPH7b/onJEGItKx0Uj5x 7X411AOVMwCoDpOeWN36VxGGlzeJnR8N4/ru9Li0ddAkH4u8ekWBDUsqU0ASJFNJdHlH Sczw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCbGZkPvR2fyj38tn4XmlfeMgoEhsB5MmhkIMZTG88wyXJyWrDq XaBW9hnhFAOkhRs7vHZfQpjeT3vJr2w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+7V6N2lSECZEkoY1p+uRVuBXIkPNVRQ/WkJTVo/PC2n5BbddHq04fLt9rhcdBA2Pl/IOma2w== X-Received: by 10.99.121.206 with SMTP id u197mr10723616pgc.242.1524546146445; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (204-195-71-95.wavecable.com. [204.195.71.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t9sm28391741pgr.37.2018.04.23.22.02.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:02:24 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Jerin Jacob Cc: Jim Murphy , Brijesh Singh , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180423220224.1bd37f5b@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <20180424034853.GA4546@jerin> References: <20180423165039.51393aad@xeon-e3> <20180423173034.7086b772@xeon-e3> <20180424034853.GA4546@jerin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_hash thread safe X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:02:27 -0000 On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:18:54 +0530 Jerin Jacob wrote: > -----Original Message----- > > Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:48:50 -0700 > > From: Jim Murphy > > To: Stephen Hemminger > > Cc: Brijesh Singh , dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_hash thread safe > > > > Anecdotally I've heard that the urcu hash implementation is slower than > > rte_hash based on pure lookup performance. Has anyone considered adding RCU > > hooks into rte_hash? > > > For one of our internal project on arm64, we did try rte_hash vs URCU hash. > Based on our results URCU lookup was much better. By default, URCU > library does not allocate the memory from huge page, But it has some > plugin based scheme to override the memory allocation scheme to choose > hugepage using DPDK backend. > Also URCU hash table can be dynamically resized. With DPDK the application has to guess at the number of hash heads which makes for bad behavior under small and large workloads.