From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358A4A0548; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 17:58:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E2E42E71; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 17:58:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lj1-f171.google.com (mail-lj1-f171.google.com [209.85.208.171]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351C242E7C for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 17:58:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f171.google.com with SMTP id bs14so4472111ljb.9 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 08:58:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=JsHs2ShbkUA7yLOZhlO0EPcHkxQEvuaAHc/kF1VFOJ8=; b=I4Vb3dhzziyA+Z4eYVwPatzi7ZTDYR+fT/hOhvO72WeGe7s7aZZX4UcmxJYo4QP/E5 8+h90D4DbXlEIApAmBP7UgR2mHj93nv3K8bBH8UOLpiTdb/i/MdUF8mq8/TTPPOw8pOL r2wD5A53unAaPMTRGRSsSiEXcdHE5QQqTsRSa90HKOCY7hWPxHIImjXtOmeBlVEaxK4z aSikDzNFpGTiKs4i1c7exgv8NjANZw6zfBMFEmb06lh97CHdSi+7UgMAsWpTzppclCSZ GD8IXZ0TK71aX4t11Iqx0jf32hBmn3YCoQP5Q3fkuv1JjPaAlR9p0hBG92AwzNazwaZd jvRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=JsHs2ShbkUA7yLOZhlO0EPcHkxQEvuaAHc/kF1VFOJ8=; b=av4GiOV4BzEcjhk4tGkqwfkG6vk/z+xqxUf/P5bFnBUH64slTBq3RI89VQbBFnzkns XvpLr5qix6UGTNn0r5Fw43asXWOKc333MYmOfw5yndi8yfosHETFIl8fJC21kpftgxIq tRJf9v0ohMRlvZe6Dy9MBEPkqj1CgW0NspLptEt1oOWb4S7CcQ5//062a4rbgiNy3aLw 2C8nvHS+8bmKybZ6pDOL/38ixGkWmEuAT0UoGcmdIVBbugABROt4cjeCFLlOSk8R4Mu3 hQhByfBp9KVIfxaQvwGFy56SSRKSNx4i7PKwAKJHAy74k8NG9NlCRwp/03KcMx/8YFCl Vffg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1Zq6n539gKKmb1d1YACZGb69sf4AVeEnJFfmuVikszHo5rRwHL CPsaJIZr6wo+GN55KObFPb0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM64vcdAA4zTi15Ze7RaCWacdsmDoa683sKYDSK5FsV5GH5ZASr3uG3rx/H1RtVX8eXqYonADQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1509:b0:26f:a762:7139 with SMTP id e9-20020a05651c150900b0026fa7627139mr3996650ljf.416.1665503921931; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 08:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sovereign (broadband-37-110-65-23.ip.moscow.rt.ru. [37.110.65.23]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s10-20020a056512314a00b0049f6484694bsm1911681lfi.161.2022.10.11.08.58.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 08:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 18:58:40 +0300 From: Dmitry Kozlyuk To: Chengwen Feng Cc: , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 9/9] app/test: add memarea to malloc-perf-autotest Message-ID: <20221011185840.01ef6f78@sovereign> In-Reply-To: <20221011121720.2657-10-fengchengwen@huawei.com> References: <20220721044648.6817-1-fengchengwen@huawei.com> <20221011121720.2657-1-fengchengwen@huawei.com> <20221011121720.2657-10-fengchengwen@huawei.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 2022-10-11 12:17 (UTC+0000), Chengwen Feng: > This patch adds memarea to malloc_perf_autotest. > > Test platform: Kunpeng920 > Test command: dpdk-test -a 0000:7d:00.3 -l 10-12 > Test result: > USER1: Performance: rte_memarea > USER1: Size (B) Runs Alloc (us) Free (us) Total (us) memset (us) > USER1: 64 10000 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.01 > USER1: 128 10000 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.01 > USER1: 1024 10000 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.20 > USER1: 4096 10000 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.34 > USER1: 65536 10000 0.10 0.08 0.18 2.14 > USER1: 1048576 644 0.10 0.04 0.14 29.07 > USER1: 2097152 322 0.10 0.04 0.14 57.50 > USER1: 4194304 161 0.12 0.04 0.15 114.50 > USER1: 16777216 40 0.11 0.04 0.15 456.09 > USER1: 1073741824 Interrupted: out of memory. [1] > > Compared with rte_malloc: > USER1: Performance: rte_malloc > USER1: Size (B) Runs Alloc (us) Free (us) Total (us) memset (us) > USER1: 64 10000 0.14 0.07 0.21 0.01 > USER1: 128 10000 0.10 0.05 0.15 0.01 > USER1: 1024 10000 0.11 0.18 0.29 0.21 > USER1: 4096 10000 0.13 0.39 0.53 0.35 > USER1: 65536 10000 0.17 2.27 2.44 2.15 > USER1: 1048576 10000 37.21 71.63 108.84 29.08 > USER1: 2097152 10000 8831.15 160.02 8991.17 63.52 > USER1: 4194304 10000 47131.88 413.75 47545.62 173.79 > USER1: 16777216 4221 119604.60 2209.73 121814.34 964.42 > USER1: 1073741824 31 335058.32 223369.31 558427.63 62440.87 > > [1] The total-size of the memarea is restricted to avoid creation > failed. This is not a fair comparison: rte_malloc time includes obtaining memory from the system. I think that memarea should have a dedicated benchmark, because eventually it will be interesting to compare memarea with different sources and algorithms. It will be also possible to add DPDK allocator to the comparison by running it for an isolated heap that doesn't grow. (In some distant future it would be cool to make DPDK allocator pluggable!) Some shared code between this benchmark and the new one can be factored out.