DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Mattias Rönnblom" <mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com>,
	"Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"Van Haaren Harry" <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
Cc: "David Marchand" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
	"dpdklab" <dpdklab@iol.unh.edu>, <ci@dpdk.org>,
	"Honnappa Nagarahalli" <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	"Aaron Conole" <aconole@redhat.com>, "dev" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: RE: rte_service unit test failing randomly
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 11:49:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8739D@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aef2561c-ee84-f4ba-632e-a0f3d5642dd3@ericsson.com>

> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 6 October 2022 10.59
> 
> On 2022-10-06 10:18, Morten Brørup wrote:
> >> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, 6 October 2022 09.51
> >>
> >> On 2022-10-06 08:53, Morten Brørup wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>> I have been wondering how accurate the tests really are. Where can
> I
> >> see what is being done to ensure that the EAL worker threads are
> fully
> >> isolated, and never interrupted by the O/S scheduler or similar?
> >>>
> >>
> >> There are kernel-level counters for how many times a thread have
> been
> >> involuntarily interrupted,
> >
> > Thanks, Mattias. I will look into that.
> >
> > Old kernels (2.4 and 2.6) ascribed the time spent in interrupt
> handlers to the CPU usage of the running process, instead of counting
> the time spent in interrupt handlers separately. Does anyone know it
> this has been fixed?
> >
> 
> If you mean top half interrupt handler, my guess would be it does not
> matter, except in some strange corner cases or faulty hardware. An ISR
> should have very short run time, and not being run *that* often (after
> NAPI). With isolated cores, it should be even less of a problem, but
> then you may not have that.
> 

Many years ago, we used a NIC that didn't have DMA, and only 4 RX descriptors, so it had to be serviced in the top half.

> Bottom halves are not attributed to the process, I believe.

This is an improvement.

> (In old
> kernels, the time spent in soft IRQs were not attributed to anything,
> which could create situations where the system was very busy indeed
> [e.g., with network stack bottom halves doing IP forwarding], but
> looking idle in 'top'.)

We also experienced that. The kernel's scheduling information was completely useless, so eventually we removed the CPU Utilization information from our GUI. ;-)

And IIRC, it wasn't fixed in kernel 2.6.

> 
> >> and also, if I recall correctly, the amount
> >> of wall-time the thread have been runnable, but not running (i.e.,
> >> waiting to be scheduled). The latter may require some scheduler
> debug
> >> kernel option being enabled on the kernel build.
> >
> >


  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-06  9:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-05 19:14 David Marchand
2022-10-05 20:33 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2022-10-05 20:52   ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-05 21:33     ` Mattias Rönnblom
2022-10-06  6:53       ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06  7:04         ` David Marchand
2022-10-06  7:50           ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06  7:50         ` Mattias Rönnblom
2022-10-06  8:18           ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06  8:59             ` Mattias Rönnblom
2022-10-06  9:49               ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2022-10-06 11:07                 ` [dpdklab] " Lincoln Lavoie
2022-10-06 12:00                   ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06 17:52                     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2022-10-06 13:51         ` Aaron Conole

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=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8739D@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
    --to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=aconole@redhat.com \
    --cc=ci@dpdk.org \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=dpdklab@iol.unh.edu \
    --cc=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
    --cc=mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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).