From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>,
John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/8] trace: simplify trace point registration
Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 13:48:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200505114837.GF6327@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALBAE1OiVhKe6wQ3LFPJqj0yEPhz5-AsWNumsbUF_TARsYX6Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 04:16:02PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 3:56 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> >
> > 05/05/2020 12:12, Jerin Jacob:
> > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:53 PM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:33 AM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > What the proposed patch here.
> > > > > > > # Making N constructors from one
> > > > > > > # Grouping global variable and register function under a single Marco
> > > > > > > and making it as N constructors.
> > > > > > > Why can we do the same logic for rte_log?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > rte_log is simple, there is nothing to simplify.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not make, rte_log_register() and the global variable under a macro?
> > > > > That's something done by the proposed patch.
> > > >
> > > > At the moment, there is not much that would go into such a macro, but
> > > > I had started to do some cleanups on logtype registration.
> > > > I did not finish because the question of the default log level is
> > > > still unclear (and I did not take the time).
> > > >
> > > > Having the logtype definition as part of the macro would be fine to me.
> > > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/57743/
> > >
> > > + Olivier (To get the feedback from rte_log PoV).
> > >
> > > The patchwork one is a bit different, IMO, Following is the mapping of
> > > this patch to rte_log one.
> > >
> > > Are we OK with the below semantics?
> > >
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/common/octeontx2/otx2_common.c
> > > b/drivers/common/octeontx2/otx2_common.c
> > > index 1a257cf07..4d391a7e0 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/common/octeontx2/otx2_common.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/common/octeontx2/otx2_common.c
> > > @@ -169,89 +169,13 @@ int otx2_npa_lf_obj_ref(void)
> > > return cnt ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> > > }
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_base;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_mbox;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_npa;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_nix;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_npc;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_tm;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_sso;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_tim;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_dpi;
> > > -/**
> > > - * @internal
> > > - */
> > > -int otx2_logtype_ep;
> > > -
> > > -RTE_INIT(otx2_log_init);
> > > -static void
> > > -otx2_log_init(void)
> > > -{
> > > - otx2_logtype_base = rte_log_register("pmd.octeontx2.base");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_base >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_base, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_mbox = rte_log_register("pmd.octeontx2.mbox");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_mbox >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_mbox, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_npa = rte_log_register("pmd.mempool.octeontx2");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_npa >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_npa, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_nix = rte_log_register("pmd.net.octeontx2");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_nix >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_nix, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_npc = rte_log_register("pmd.net.octeontx2.flow");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_npc >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_npc, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_tm = rte_log_register("pmd.net.octeontx2.tm");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_tm >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_tm, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_sso = rte_log_register("pmd.event.octeontx2");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_sso >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_sso, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_tim = rte_log_register("pmd.event.octeontx2.timer");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_tim >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_tim, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_dpi = rte_log_register("pmd.raw.octeontx2.dpi");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_dpi >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_dpi, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > - otx2_logtype_ep = rte_log_register("pmd.raw.octeontx2.ep");
> > > - if (otx2_logtype_ep >= 0)
> > > - rte_log_set_level(otx2_logtype_ep, RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
> > > -
> > > -}
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_base, pmd.octeontx2.base, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_mbox, pmd.octeontx2.mbox, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_npa, pmd.mempool.octeontx2, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_nix, pmd.net.octeontx2, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_npc, pmd.net.octeontx2.flow, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_tm, pmd.net.octeontx2.tm, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_sso, pmd.event.octeontx2, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_tim, pmd.event.octeontx2.timer, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_dpi, pmd.raw.octeontx2.dpi, NOTICE);
> > > +RTE_LOG_REGISTER(otx2_logtype_ep, pmd.raw.octeontx2.ep, NOTICE);
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/include/rte_log.h b/lib/librte_eal/include/rte_log.h
> > > index 1789ede56..22fc3802f 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/include/rte_log.h
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/include/rte_log.h
> > > @@ -376,6 +376,15 @@ int rte_vlog(uint32_t level, uint32_t logtype,
> > > const char *format, va_list ap)
> > > RTE_LOGTYPE_ ## t, # t ": " __VA_ARGS__) : \
> > > 0)
> > >
> > > +#define RTE_LOG_REGISTER(type, name, level) \
> > > +int type; \
> > > +RTE_INIT(__##type) \
> > > +{ \
> > > + type = rte_log_register(RTE_STR(name)); \
> > > + if (type >= 0) \
> > > + rte_log_set_level(type, RTE_LOG_##level); \
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> >
> > Yes I agree, we could do that.
> > And now I better understand what you mean comparing rte_trace and rte_log.
>
> OK.
>
> Let Olivier share his view, I was/is under the impression that, The
> reason for not have this silly Marco to
> don't explode constructor usage in dpdk
>
> If we are OK this scheme then lets first clean up rte_log registration.
Honnestly, I had no particular idea in mind about constructor number
when I added the rte_log_register() API. To me, it was quite simple:
just call a register function when you need a new log type. Now, as it's
mostly (always?) done at init time, I'm fine with the the principle of
having a macro to register new logs, given we also keep the previous
API.
To get back on the topic of the thread (RTE_TRACE), I think a simpler
API (one macro) is better. Since it's a new API, it makes sense to make
it as good as possible for the first version.
And by the way, thank you for this nice work.
Regards,
Olivier
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > > rte_trace requires 3 macros calls per trace type:
> > > > > > > > RTE_TRACE_POINT_REGISTER, RTE_TRACE_POINT_DEFINE, RTE_TRACE_POINT_ARGS
> > > > > > > > This patch is unifying the first 2 macro calls to make usage simpler,
> > > > > > > > and ease rte_trace adoption.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > RTE_TRACE_POINT_ARGS is NOP and for the syntax.
> > > > > > > It is similar to rte_log. rte_log don't have RTE_TRACE_POINT_REGISTER instead
> > > > > > > it is creating global variable see, "int otx2_logtype_base;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Note: the other usability weirdness is mandating declaring each trace
> > > > > > > > function with a magic double underscore prefix which appears nowhere else.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Analyze the impact wrt boot time and cross-platform pov as the log
> > > > > > > > > has a lot of entries to test. If the usage makes sense then it should make sense
> > > > > > > > > for rte_log too. I would like to NOT have trace to be the first
> > > > > > > > > library to explode
> > > > > > > > > with the constructor scheme. I suggest removing this specific patch from RC2 and
> > > > > > > > > revisit later.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You still did not give any argument against increasing the number
> > > > > > > > of constructors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you are proposing the new scheme, you have to prove the overhead
> > > > > > > with a significant number of constructors
> > > > > > > and why it has differed from existing scheme of things. That's is the
> > > > > > > norm in opensource.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I say there is no overhead.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please share the data.
> > > >
> > > > Measured time between first rte_trace_point_register and last one with
> > > > a simple patch:
> > >
> > > I will try to reproduce this, once we finalize on the above synergy
> > > with rte_log.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_trace.c
> > > > b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_trace.c
> > > > index 875553d7e..95618314b 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_trace.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_trace.c
> > > > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> > > > #include <regex.h>
> > > >
> > > > #include <rte_common.h>
> > > > +#include <rte_cycles.h>
> > > > #include <rte_errno.h>
> > > > #include <rte_lcore.h>
> > > > #include <rte_per_lcore.h>
> > > > @@ -23,6 +24,9 @@ static RTE_DEFINE_PER_LCORE(int, ctf_count);
> > > > static struct trace_point_head tp_list = STAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(tp_list);
> > > > static struct trace trace = { .args = STAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(trace.args), };
> > > >
> > > > +uint64_t first_register;
> > > > +uint64_t last_register;
> > > > +
> > > > struct trace *
> > > > trace_obj_get(void)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -43,6 +47,8 @@ eal_trace_init(void)
> > > > /* Trace memory should start with 8B aligned for natural alignment */
> > > > RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON((offsetof(struct __rte_trace_header, mem) % 8) != 0);
> > > >
> > > > + trace_err("delta=%"PRIu64, last_register - first_register);
> > > > +
> > > > /* One of the trace point registration failed */
> > > > if (trace.register_errno) {
> > > > rte_errno = trace.register_errno;
> > > > @@ -425,6 +431,9 @@ __rte_trace_point_register(rte_trace_point_t
> > > > *handle, const char *name,
> > > > goto fail;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + if (first_register == 0)
> > > > + first_register = rte_get_tsc_cycles();
> > > > +
> > > > /* Check the size of the trace point object */
> > > > RTE_PER_LCORE(trace_point_sz) = 0;
> > > > RTE_PER_LCORE(ctf_count) = 0;
> > > > @@ -486,6 +495,8 @@ __rte_trace_point_register(rte_trace_point_t
> > > > *handle, const char *name,
> > > > STAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&tp_list, tp, next);
> > > > __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> > > >
> > > > + last_register = rte_get_tsc_cycles();
> > > > +
> > > > /* All Good !!! */
> > > > return 0;
> > > > free:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I started testpmd 100 times for static and shared gcc builds
> > > > (test-meson-builds.sh) on a system with a 2.6GHz xeon.
> > > >
> > > > v20.05-rc1-13-g08dd97130 (before patch):
> > > > static: count=100, min=580812, max=1482326, avg=1764932
> > > > shared: count=100, min=554648, max=1344163, avg=1704638
> > > >
> > > > v20.05-rc1-14-g44250f392 (after patch):
> > > > static: count=100, min=668273, max=1530330, avg=1682548
> > > > shared: count=100, min=554634, max=1330264, avg=1672398
> >
> >
> >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-05 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-03 20:31 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] Traces cleanup for rc2 David Marchand
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/8] cryptodev: fix trace points registration David Marchand
2020-05-04 7:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/8] trace: simplify trace point registration David Marchand
2020-05-04 2:46 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-04 14:02 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-04 14:04 ` David Marchand
2020-05-04 14:39 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-04 17:08 ` David Marchand
2020-05-04 17:19 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-04 17:40 ` David Marchand
2020-05-04 17:54 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-04 21:31 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 3:43 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 7:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 7:17 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 7:24 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 7:33 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 8:23 ` David Marchand
2020-05-05 10:12 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 10:26 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 10:46 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 11:48 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2020-05-05 11:35 ` David Marchand
2020-05-05 12:26 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 15:25 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 16:28 ` David Marchand
2020-05-05 16:46 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 16:58 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 17:08 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 17:09 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 17:20 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-05 17:28 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05 20:10 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-06 6:11 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-07-04 14:31 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-07-04 15:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " David Marchand
2020-07-05 19:41 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/8] trace: simplify trace point headers David Marchand
2020-05-04 6:12 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/8] trace: avoid confusion on optarg David Marchand
2020-05-04 7:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-04 14:09 ` David Marchand
2020-05-05 5:45 ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-05 5:47 ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/8] trace: remove unneeded checks in internal API David Marchand
2020-05-04 8:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/8] trace: remove limitation on patterns number David Marchand
2020-05-04 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-04 14:14 ` David Marchand
2020-05-05 5:54 ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 7/8] trace: remove string duplication David Marchand
2020-05-04 9:01 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-03 20:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 8/8] trace: fix build with gcc 10 David Marchand
2020-05-06 13:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] Traces cleanup for rc2 David Marchand
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=20200505114837.GF6327@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
--cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
--cc=skori@marvell.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).