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 80521A04B7; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:10:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F48F1DCF7; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:10:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com (mail-io1-f68.google.com [209.85.166.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB171BCF5 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:10:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id r4so4384202ioh.0 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:10:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=am+31zpYAtQc01o/7rUrUmucIApsB2YpmScRRsn+i3Y=; b=L1t61vwB5IjBgUu58BCAgzfDkmL3TEXHLuDyJS1NYQkqalP7Me7m3p294SHbl3XXOy DI0S19M8cwzgub5+A3CN5THfI9sce6eYq8kFoVLY3X/FJ3E1C+Na51HH74eemR0IYt3X fo+YiSJS0OFtpPJnE/WSYkHDpEFdL3WtbvFk0fwyqowtQQwVICVdkd5FS8xB/QJt04l7 eXvoleOK7HblBUnsnnFhVcILgKg6UA/5xXNSgx1w5GumsR5QR0fKaE8hdBvAwQqkkWbN wVR53H+2rvalGADNeMffgrallDXchvzTrYO688ATaZJXa7x5Q5x6fsi0AB8BclnwLJ4b X9UA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=am+31zpYAtQc01o/7rUrUmucIApsB2YpmScRRsn+i3Y=; b=VMJwYZiPcL83S2IBjv10m2/k3fLtJScrcFicLs9gIg3gDcdjzKbnoTLL7lTtRUwG58 xo78X6S1spp1bH8fBt3XQXaIgDPg2sZpjE4T0SiTPj8qf60UVAiS7X22SY+XAOZgjhQQ WGplI1bh/T1KriGN4uwFKbNb/zPZV6EYGcJhx5GnbONUHY7AOrhzB5NL3oKz9Wl1RDBs sUDLa3edcN1tbpkP7E0OaamVQKhbn4CB+zQPevjJno8qNyClVVv2uJafe/Ak1B+fO5AA A5OL/nKxdh9zN7Es5r/obxMPonjM1Y11MM3x4BrXz2HyMDseffnzOzuVadxVaU+bBHXa d0YQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5338DdgYM9DHNR6JX94nhxQbKfOtlWLIh22LCmtIO7N0cHpSiZ/+ nnT/4VfjL7BHM71Eq7i3UHvlzLT1Z9SDOMBra4k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxQopfJLOdyT1HiXaoW5PkqPYDkyosiXVZV7pXaVzE+Wc4r/yN4KlQd8tthJAEiX9ijlhQ95aAaic1hg2FQkxo= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:5019:: with SMTP id e25mr2300630iob.123.1602670208435; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:10:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200908105211.10066-1-radu.nicolau@intel.com> <46118f3466274596a663d7d44abb680a@intel.com> <20200925102805.GD923@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 15:39:52 +0530 Message-ID: To: "Nicolau, Radu" Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Van Haaren, Harry" , Honnappa Nagarahalli , "Richardson, Bruce" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , nd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] event/sw: performance improvements 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" On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:02 PM Nicolau, Radu wrote: > > > On 10/13/2020 8:11 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:22 PM Ananyev, Konstantin > > wrote: > >>> On 10/6/2020 11:13 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Jerin Jacob > >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 5:35 PM > >>>>>> To: Nicolau, Radu > >>>>>> Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli ; Richardson, Bruce > >>>>>> ; Ananyev, Konstantin > >>>>>> ; Van Haaren, Harry > >>>>>> ; dev@dpdk.org; jerinj@marvell.com; nd > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] event/sw: performance improvements > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 2:32 PM Nicolau, Radu wrote: > > a concern that another library not uses public ring API, > >>>> but instead accesses ring internals directly. Obviously such coding practice is not welcomed > >>>> as it makes harder to maintain/extend ring library in future. > >>>> About 2) - these new API can(/shoud) be marked an experimental anyway. > >>>> As another thing - it is still unclear what a performance gain we are talking about here. > >>>> Is it really worth it comparing to just using SP/SC? > >>> The change itself came after I analyzed the memory bound sections of the > >>> code, and I just did a quick test, I got about 3.5% improvement in > >>> throughput, maybe not so much but significant for such a small change, > >>> and depending on the usecase it may be more. > >>> > >>> As for the implementation itself, I would favour having a custom ring > >>> like container in the PMD code, this will solve the issue of using > >>> rte_ring internals while still allow for full optimisation. If this is > >>> acceptable, I will follow up by tomorrow. > >> Sounds ok to me. > > Nicolau Radu, > > > > Could you supersede this patch, if the plan is to send it to a new > > version based on a custom ring? > The v3 (https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/79879/) sent last week > implements the custom ring and does not use the rte_ring internals. v1 > and v2 are superseded. Ok. Looks good to me. @Honnappa Nagarahalli @Ananyev, Konstantin , I will merge this patch if there are no more objections for v3.