From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Olivier Matz" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"Andrew Rybchenko" <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
"Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Jerin Jacob" <jerinj@marvell.com>,
"Beilei Xing" <beilei.xing@intel.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 12:52:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8736C@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8712B@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
PING again.
If the explanation and/or diff is too longwinded, just look at the resulting code instead - it is clean and easily readable.
This patch should not be controversial, so I would like to see it merged into the coming LTS release. (Unlike my other mempool patch [3], which changes the behavior of the mempool cache.)
[3]: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220202103354.79832-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com/
Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards,
-Morten Brørup
> From: Morten Brørup [mailto:mb@smartsharesystems.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 15 June 2022 23.18
>
> +CC: Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>, i40e maintainer, may be
> interested in the performance improvements achieved by this patch.
>
> > From: Morten Brørup [mailto:mb@smartsharesystems.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 09.14
> >
> > A flush threshold for the mempool cache was introduced in DPDK
> version
> > 1.3, but rte_mempool_do_generic_get() was not completely updated back
> > then, and some inefficiencies were introduced.
> >
> > This patch fixes the following in rte_mempool_do_generic_get():
> >
> > 1. The code that initially screens the cache request was not updated
> > with the change in DPDK version 1.3.
> > The initial screening compared the request length to the cache size,
> > which was correct before, but became irrelevant with the introduction
> > of
> > the flush threshold. E.g. the cache can hold up to flushthresh
> objects,
> > which is more than its size, so some requests were not served from
> the
> > cache, even though they could be.
> > The initial screening has now been corrected to match the initial
> > screening in rte_mempool_do_generic_put(), which verifies that a
> cache
> > is present, and that the length of the request does not overflow the
> > memory allocated for the cache.
> >
> > This bug caused a major performance degradation in scenarios where
> the
> > application burst length is the same as the cache size. In such
> cases,
> > the objects were not ever fetched from the mempool cache, regardless
> if
> > they could have been.
> > This scenario occurs e.g. if an application has configured a mempool
> > with a size matching the application's burst size.
> >
> > 2. The function is a helper for rte_mempool_generic_get(), so it must
> > behave according to the description of that function.
> > Specifically, objects must first be returned from the cache,
> > subsequently from the ring.
> > After the change in DPDK version 1.3, this was not the behavior when
> > the request was partially satisfied from the cache; instead, the
> > objects
> > from the ring were returned ahead of the objects from the cache.
> > This bug degraded application performance on CPUs with a small L1
> > cache,
> > which benefit from having the hot objects first in the returned
> array.
> > (This is probably also the reason why the function returns the
> objects
> > in reverse order, which it still does.)
> > Now, all code paths first return objects from the cache, subsequently
> > from the ring.
> >
> > The function was not behaving as described (by the function using it)
> > and expected by applications using it. This in itself is also a bug.
> >
> > 3. If the cache could not be backfilled, the function would attempt
> > to get all the requested objects from the ring (instead of only the
> > number of requested objects minus the objects available in the ring),
> > and the function would fail if that failed.
> > Now, the first part of the request is always satisfied from the
> cache,
> > and if the subsequent backfilling of the cache from the ring fails,
> > only
> > the remaining requested objects are retrieved from the ring.
> >
> > The function would fail despite there are enough objects in the cache
> > plus the common pool.
> >
> > 4. The code flow for satisfying the request from the cache was
> slightly
> > inefficient:
> > The likely code path where the objects are simply served from the
> cache
> > was treated as unlikely. Now it is treated as likely.
> > And in the code path where the cache was backfilled first, numbers
> were
> > added and subtracted from the cache length; now this code path simply
> > sets the cache length to its final value.
> >
> > v2 changes
> > - Do not modify description of return value. This belongs in a
> separate
> > doc fix.
> > - Elaborate even more on which bugs the modifications fix.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> > ---
> > lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> --
> > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> > index 1e7a3c1527..2898c690b0 100644
> > --- a/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> > +++ b/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> > @@ -1463,38 +1463,71 @@ rte_mempool_do_generic_get(struct rte_mempool
> > *mp, void **obj_table,
> > uint32_t index, len;
> > void **cache_objs;
> >
> > - /* No cache provided or cannot be satisfied from cache */
> > - if (unlikely(cache == NULL || n >= cache->size))
> > + /* No cache provided or if get would overflow mem allocated for
> > cache */
> > + if (unlikely(cache == NULL || n > RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE))
> > goto ring_dequeue;
> >
> > - cache_objs = cache->objs;
> > + cache_objs = &cache->objs[cache->len];
> > +
> > + if (n <= cache->len) {
> > + /* The entire request can be satisfied from the cache. */
> > + cache->len -= n;
> > + for (index = 0; index < n; index++)
> > + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
> > +
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
> >
> > - /* Can this be satisfied from the cache? */
> > - if (cache->len < n) {
> > - /* No. Backfill the cache first, and then fill from it */
> > - uint32_t req = n + (cache->size - cache->len);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> >
> > - /* How many do we require i.e. number to fill the cache +
> > the request */
> > - ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp,
> > - &cache->objs[cache->len], req);
> > + /* Satisfy the first part of the request by depleting the cache.
> > */
> > + len = cache->len;
> > + for (index = 0; index < len; index++)
> > + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
> > +
> > + /* Number of objects remaining to satisfy the request. */
> > + len = n - len;
> > +
> > + /* Fill the cache from the ring; fetch size + remaining objects.
> > */
> > + ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, cache->objs,
> > + cache->size + len);
> > + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> > + /*
> > + * We are buffer constrained, and not able to allocate
> > + * cache + remaining.
> > + * Do not fill the cache, just satisfy the remaining part
> > of
> > + * the request directly from the ring.
> > + */
> > + ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, obj_table, len);
> > if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> > /*
> > - * In the off chance that we are buffer constrained,
> > - * where we are not able to allocate cache + n, go to
> > - * the ring directly. If that fails, we are truly out
> > of
> > - * buffers.
> > + * That also failed.
> > + * No further action is required to roll the first
> > + * part of the request back into the cache, as both
> > + * cache->len and the objects in the cache are
> > intact.
> > */
> > - goto ring_dequeue;
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_bulk, 1);
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_objs, n);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> > - cache->len += req;
> > + /* Commit that the cache was emptied. */
> > + cache->len = 0;
> > +
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> > + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > - /* Now fill in the response ... */
> > - for (index = 0, len = cache->len - 1; index < n; ++index, len--,
> > obj_table++)
> > - *obj_table = cache_objs[len];
> > + cache_objs = &cache->objs[cache->size + len];
> >
> > - cache->len -= n;
> > + /* Satisfy the remaining part of the request from the filled
> > cache. */
> > + cache->len = cache->size;
> > + for (index = 0; index < len; index++)
> > + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
> >
> > RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> > RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
> > @@ -1503,7 +1536,7 @@ rte_mempool_do_generic_get(struct rte_mempool
> > *mp, void **obj_table,
> >
> > ring_dequeue:
> >
> > - /* get remaining objects from ring */
> > + /* Get the objects from the ring. */
> > ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, obj_table, n);
> >
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > --
> > 2.17.1
>
> PING.
>
> According to Patchwork [1], this patch provides up to 10.9 % single
> thread throughput improvement on XL710 with x86, and 0.7 % improvement
> with ARM.
>
> Still no interest?
>
> PS: Bruce reviewed V1 of this patch [2], but I don't think it is
> appropriate copying a Reviewed-by tag from one version of a patch to
> another, regardless how small the changes are.
>
> [1] http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2022-
> February/256462.html
> [2] http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/YeaDSxj%2FuZ0vPMl+@bricha3-
> MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-29 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-26 15:34 [RFC] mempool: rte_mempool_do_generic_get optimizations Morten Brørup
2022-01-06 12:23 ` [PATCH] mempool: optimize incomplete cache handling Morten Brørup
2022-01-06 16:55 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-01-07 8:46 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-10 7:26 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-01-10 10:55 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-14 16:36 ` [PATCH] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Morten Brørup
2022-01-17 17:35 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-01-18 8:25 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-18 9:07 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-01-24 15:38 ` Olivier Matz
2022-01-24 16:11 ` Olivier Matz
2022-01-28 10:22 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-17 11:52 ` [PATCH] mempool: optimize put objects to " Morten Brørup
2022-01-19 14:52 ` [PATCH v2] mempool: fix " Morten Brørup
2022-01-19 15:03 ` [PATCH v3] " Morten Brørup
2022-01-24 15:39 ` Olivier Matz
2022-01-28 9:37 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-02 8:14 ` [PATCH v2] mempool: fix get objects from " Morten Brørup
2022-06-15 21:18 ` Morten Brørup
2022-09-29 10:52 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2022-10-04 12:57 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 15:13 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 15:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 18:09 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06 13:43 ` Aaron Conole
2022-10-04 16:03 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 16:36 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 16:39 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-02 10:33 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 9:04 ` Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 9:14 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 9:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 10:32 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 10:43 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 11:36 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 20:01 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 11:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 11:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] mempool: avoid usage of term ring on put Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:08 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 13:14 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 13:19 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 12:53 ` [PATCH v3] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 14:42 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-07 10:44 ` [PATCH v4] " Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-08 20:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-11 20:30 ` Copy-pasted code should be updated Morten Brørup
2022-10-11 21:47 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2022-10-30 8:44 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 22:50 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2022-10-14 14:01 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Olivier Matz
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 0/4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] mempool: avoid usage of term ring on put Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] mempool: fix cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 14:31 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 14:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 15:08 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 14:01 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-14 15:57 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 19:50 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-15 6:57 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-18 16:32 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] mempool: flush cache completely on overflow Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 14:44 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 14:01 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-10 15:21 ` [PATCH v6 0/4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-11 19:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 14:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-26 14:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 14:44 ` [PATCH] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 19:44 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-27 8:34 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-27 9:22 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-27 11:42 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-27 12:11 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-27 15:20 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-28 6:35 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] " Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:35 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] mempool: optimized debug statistics Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:41 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:41 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] mempool: optimized debug statistics Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 9:09 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 9:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-30 9:17 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8736C@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=beilei.xing@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).