[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes:ba885531ac26 ("rte_timer: timer lag issue")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
  Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

Hello,

I corrected the fixes line, Can you please review the change and if no further comments can you please let me know the next steps. Thanks.

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash 
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:02 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com; Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes:ba885531ac26 ("rte_timer: timer lag issue")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
  Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Thomas Monjalon]

Hi,

2016-09-21 17:08, Karmarkar Suyash:
> Hello,
> 
> I corrected the fixes line, Can you please review the change and if no further comments can you please let me know the next steps. Thanks.

The Fixes lines is still not correct. The id ba885531ac26 do not exist.
Please check your patch with scripts/check-git-log.sh.
Karmarkar, it is preferred to use --in-reply-to when sending a new version.

Please Robert, could you check it is a right fix?
Thanks

> --- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
> @@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
>  			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
>  			rte_wmb();
>  			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> -			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
> +			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
>  				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
>  			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
>  		}

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

Hello,

Can you please review the changes and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash 
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:54 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Cc: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

Hello Robert/Thomas,

Can you please review the changes in V2 of the Patch and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash 
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 10:27 AM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

Hello,

Can you please review the changes and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:54 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Cc: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

--
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Sanford, Robert]

Sorry, just saw this. I will take a look and get back shortly.

--
Regards,
Robert



On 10/4/16, 3:31 PM, "Karmarkar Suyash" <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com> wrote:

Hello Robert/Thomas,

Can you please review the changes in V2 of the Patch and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash 
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 10:27 AM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

Hello,

Can you please review the changes and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:54 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Cc: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

--
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Sanford, Robert]

Yes, this change makes sense. I ran timer tests and they passed.

Acked-by: Robert Sanford <rsanford@akamai.com>

Thanks,
Robert



On 9/29/16, 10:27 AM, "Karmarkar Suyash" <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com> wrote:

Hello,

Can you please review the changes and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash 
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:54 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Cc: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

Thanks !! So as next steps I will push the patch .

-----Original Message-----
From: Sanford, Robert [mailto:rsanford@akamai.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 5:40 PM
To: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>; dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

Yes, this change makes sense. I ran timer tests and they passed.

Acked-by: Robert Sanford <rsanford@akamai.com>

Thanks,
Robert



On 9/29/16, 10:27 AM, "Karmarkar Suyash" <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com> wrote:

Hello,

Can you please review the changes and suggest next steps? Thanks

Regards
Suyash Karmarkar

-----Original Message-----
From: Karmarkar Suyash
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:54 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; rsanford@akamai.com; reshma.pattan@intel.com
Cc: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

--
2.9.3.windows.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Pattan, Reshma]

Hi  Suyash,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karmarkar Suyash [mailto:skarmarkar@sonusnet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 11:36 PM
> To: Sanford, Robert <rsanford@akamai.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
> thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; Pattan, Reshma <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction
> 
> Thanks !! So as next steps I will push the patch .
> 

Thomas will apply the patch, you no need to do anything.

Thanks,
Reshma

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Thomas Monjalon]

> > For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code
> > added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized
> > by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code
> > would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the
> > lag added.Corrected the behavior.
> > 
> > Fixes: 9b15ba89 ("timer: use a skip list")
> > 
> > Karmarkar Suyash (1):
> > Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>
> 
> Yes, this change makes sense. I ran timer tests and they passed.
> 
> Acked-by: Robert Sanford <rsanford@akamai.com>

Applied, thanks

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2]:rte_timer:timer lag issue correction

[Karmarkar Suyash]

For Periodic timers ,if the lag gets introduced, the current code 
added additional delay when the next peridoc timer was initialized 
by not taking into account the delay added, with this fix the code 
would start the next occurrence of timer keeping in account the 
lag added.Corrected the behavior.

Fixes:ba885531ac26 ("rte_timer: timer lag issue")

Karmarkar Suyash (1):
  Signed-off-by: Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>

 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

 
---
 lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
index 43da836..18782fa 100644
--- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
+++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
@@ -613,7 +613,7 @@ void rte_timer_manage(void)
 			status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
 			rte_wmb();
 			tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
-			__rte_timer_reset(tim, cur_time + tim->period,
+			__rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
 				tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1);
 			rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[lcore_id].list_lock);
 		}

-- 
2.9.3.windows.1