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 E0315A056A; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:46:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C365222A55F; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:46:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from new4-smtp.messagingengine.com (new4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.230]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED6D22A483 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:46:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2722C580864; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:46:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:46:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm3; bh= x4FyzrVMdwwQPqtfHE8SKnwYktUBLHksIBKwtoQLM7c=; b=hPm8PpbqOqXJ32WJ fxCsQwBZjNxXx2BZre7NoazCWU+G2FCef1BsPwOFige/dADzZOuZ45zaoHlPtpx4 utV/Tdgb8e6wDzfWlm523sKPUnYxNZfNWrm5I4yICJiqb/EKY4cAnp76GjiZa8vq k4/GF0cIWPSp4VvT8nD9QzRcBhB3bo3ebFtQS1/BwEKFGRhhf56CVh9MBR2/q6Fj V6Nom/rO3KsUYhmppI0i4FuoZh+yFWcqTBKg0n9ELgNX4BYSaKFQn9XBRvOcs4rv Qfv3lbVLxPuBXhec0Uz7WRITVkIfn/6OfRyWwFi5qFs7jUIB+vZkGXHYhSIhQf6v mmIr5A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=x4FyzrVMdwwQPqtfHE8SKnwYktUBLHksIBKwtoQLM 7c=; b=UqMn2okdt3q5Ct1UiZdtFiH9dvzgDe0FyU5dC+DBY9vwjwoYELa1TlMTM VVlsHgD5K7khHQ/2DuhuJ7vmITeH/rs6ghqIWd5tZY68Szw/jw+8hGNO56lkCis/ h0NH+Z/VgoipPpH/uUg2g2uxONYVSLS6pQ+zu6AJSrRxAQayNhO6V9DC92wfTU2D ikpk9FEuIbDOts8UIne+bPZ5659V6pwMA/2jShR7GikMFpNNwfdwTCca9nAVypOj qYx0hB3+mHl/VaxLXrTRabbCv8mAZtOlzdMH1FQMsFS6iYX1I9AbHdOxVAAiGXv3 ZhKBKkjIGk1K0mlcpQIXIMcTOG2OQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledruddvtddgkeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A7B6F240067; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:46:24 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Honnappa Nagarahalli Cc: Jerin Jacob , "dev@dpdk.org" , Kathleen Capella , Dharmik Thakkar , Ruifeng Wang , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , Bruce Richardson , "jerinj@marvell.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , Ferruh Yigit , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Stephen Hemminger , nd Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:46:22 +0100 Message-ID: <2273212.ItJIoklBD0@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] L3fwd mode in testpmd 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 Sender: "dev" 11/03/2021 16:18, Honnappa Nagarahalli: > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:01 AM Honnappa Nagarahalli > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > Performance of L3fwd example application is one of the key > > benchmarks in DPDK. However, the application does not have many > > debugging statistics to understand the performance issues. We have added > > L3fwd as another mode/stream to testpmd which provides enough statistics > > at various levels. This has allowed us to debug the performance issues > > effectively. > > > > > > There is more work to be done to get it to upstreamable state. I am > > wondering if such a patch is helpful for others and if the community would > > be interested in taking a look. Please let me know what you think. > > > > We are using app/proc-info/ to attach and analyze the performance. > > That helps to analyze the unmodified application. I think, if something is > > missing in proc-info app, in my opinion it is better to enhance proc-info so > > that it can help other third-party applications. > > > > Just my 2c. > Thanks Jerin. We will explore that. I agree it is dangerous to rely too much on testpmd for everything. Please tell us what in testpmd could be useful out of it.