From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FCA6A0583; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:51:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64B02BB9; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:51:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5CF3B5 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:51:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A63C5C02C3; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:51:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:51:49 -0400 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=mesmtp; bh=nfID3zogvMZeImiCnuZuem+Rq2xjpe+PKjTEELDxzDo=; b=DTnlP1FkuSuY OKZ6uVYE37qSG8Yxpiwfa64d70kT84p56BG4qer/bWMN4uwBhllAxWYbPzpDrgwN n/6CCU3SO3cpXVuW2NMy1rT6Q10TzxbYUTlTZCvA3byB0sbQ0JQGWkT7SuxKfdvJ bkAFC2/yVWaJ7H6zPh588Oe/ptF+sQ8= 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=nfID3zogvMZeImiCnuZuem+Rq2xjpe+PKjTEELDxz Do=; b=IHSXHTcs037U9OhzrPlNqHCiJLK2Ah6x+jN4rZTY4cw/G4MdD2ekIAx2G thbPQn+iitnmkaARGwkjKhpdpW/5HGmlO21hGE0YZqM71ckaadIqRLNeVKfQB5GC TJZGw+ZEAAg+GHne7Uo4bHTeQJSsypH6oQE+l82ZlRclIoyqvsXGs2hhnw3rhMkv QIUQrMkCAs53pY4USkRE5KLa+/jGTD/UPYgioU87cLGQsU4wkrmqkjN1Q01iwtEa VqboX2FUvzX5yMVsPxB8hSZQTd7NtifZ1y8ujE259VH8uT3pOH8V7qQ6F1HbQZU+ PjLV/8GiTMwbutWnoRG8POLJZBPrQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudeguddgfeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght 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 8ADD430614FA; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:51:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Cc: Wisam Jaddo , dpdk-dev , Matan Azrad , Raslan Darawsheh Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:51:47 +0100 Message-ID: <2710919.e9J7NaK4W3@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1584452772-31147-1-git-send-email-wisamm@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] app/test-flow-perf: add rte_flow perf app 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 20/03/2020 07:49, Jerin Jacob: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 7:16 PM Wisam Jaddo wrote: > > Thanks for this application. Useful stuff. > > > > > Introducing new application for rte_flow performance > > testing. The application provide the ability to test > > insertion rate of specific rte_flow rule, by stressing > > it to the NIC, and calculate the insertion rate. > > > > It also provides packet per second measurements > > after the insertion operation is done. > > > > The application offers some options in the command > > line, to configure which rule to apply. > > > > After that the application will start producing rules > > with same pattern but increasing the outer IP source > > address by 1 each time, thus it will give different > > flow each time, and all other items will have open masks. > > > > The current design have single core insertion rate. > > In the future we may have a multi core insertion rate > > measurement support in the app. > > If I understand correctly, > # On the main thread, this application first check the flow insertion > performance > # and then start the worker thread for packet forwarding. > Why this application testing the packet forwarding?, We already have > testpmd for that. I think it is interesting to measure forwarding performance when million of flow rules are in effect. > IMO, This application needs to focus only on > - Insertion performance > - Deletion performance > - IMO, it is better to add a framework for the profile where the first > version of this application can > define common a set of ITEMS and set of ACTION and later others can extend it. > And the framework can run over all the profiles and spit out the > insertion and deletion > performance. What do you call a profile? Is it a set of rules? I think this first version is proposing rules customization with parameters. Note: I prefer a non-interactive application for performance testing. > > The app supports single and multi core performance > > measurements.