From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D0E1C16C for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:51:53 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Apr 2018 04:51:51 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,405,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="29448192" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by fmsmga007.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 04 Apr 2018 04:51:51 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx123.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.38) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:51:51 -0700 Received: from bgsmsx103.gar.corp.intel.com (10.223.4.130) by fmsmsx123.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:51:51 -0700 Received: from bgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.52]) by BGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.12]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 17:21:48 +0530 From: "Varghese, Vipin" To: "Van Haaren, Harry" , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [PATCH 2/2] event/sw: code refractor for sw_refill_pp_buf Thread-Index: AQHTsWSxIEvbxRvPWUuH3CJEV8xj5qPu1a0AgAHd/IA= Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:51:47 +0000 Message-ID: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D1C5205@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> References: <1519932900-10571-1-git-send-email-vipin.varghese@intel.com> <1519932900-10571-2-git-send-email-vipin.varghese@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNWJjM2NhM2YtMTU3ZS00ZTRmLWI5NGYtMGM0ODIxNTNjYjUwIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjIuNS4xOCIsIlRydXN0ZWRMYWJlbEhhc2giOiJxbFQwUDdpMWpqVXFWQjgyaUxkZ3hyMW1md3B0bDNZaUg1NFVuYmcyMTZQWUZ3a0d1bk53ZDVqQ2VZZ3ZmM3A5In0= dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.200.100 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.223.10.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] event/sw: code refractor for sw_refill_pp_buf 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:51:54 -0000 Sure Harry, I am ok with your suggestion. > -----Original Message----- > From: Van Haaren, Harry > Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 6:20 PM > To: Varghese, Vipin ; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] event/sw: code refractor for sw_refill_pp_buf >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Varghese, Vipin > > Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 7:35 PM > > To: dev@dpdk.org; Van Haaren, Harry > > Cc: Varghese, Vipin > > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] event/sw: code refractor for sw_refill_pp_buf > > > > Code changes how shadow buffer are filled up in each calls. > > Refilling the shadow buffer helped in improving 0.2 Mpps. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vipin Varghese > > --- > > drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c > > b/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c > > index 70d1970..a95a22a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c > > +++ b/drivers/event/sw/sw_evdev_scheduler.c > > @@ -451,6 +451,10 @@ __pull_port_lb(struct sw_evdev *sw, uint32_t > > port_id, int > > allow_reorder) > > port->pp_buf_count--; > > } /* while (avail_qes) */ > > > > + /* replensih buffers before next iteration */ > > + if (port->pp_buf_count =3D=3D 0) > > + sw_refill_pp_buf(sw, port); > > + > > return pkts_iter; > > } >=20 >=20 > I see the goal here - to ensure that the port buffer has items when we ne= xt enter > this function, possibly reducing a stall waiting for the ring access. >=20 > In theory this is a good idea - in practice, I see a small performance de= gradation. > Hence, I suggest we drop this patch from the patchset, and merge 1/2 alon= e.