From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ring: make ring implementation non-inlined
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 02:39:15 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALBAE1OuOwpQhSX9rKSKUy6BdypcCBWnYWuxR8ioAo4YXT-LFw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200320164138.8510-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:11 PM Konstantin Ananyev
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
>
> As was discussed here:
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-February/158586.html
> this RFC aimed to hide ring internals into .c and make all
> ring functions non-inlined. In theory that might help to
> maintain ABI stability in future.
> This is just a POC to measure the impact of proposed idea,
> proper implementation would definetly need some extra effort.
> On IA box (SKX) ring_perf_autotest shows ~20-30 cycles extra for
> enqueue+dequeue pair. On some more realistic code, I suspect
> the impact it might be a bit higher.
> For MP/MC bulk transfers degradation seems quite small,
> though for SP/SC and/or small transfers it is more then noticable
> (see exact numbers below).
> From my perspective we'd probably keep it inlined for now
> to avoid any non-anticipated perfomance degradations.
> Though intersted to see perf results and opinions from
> other interested parties.
+1
My reasoning is a bit different, DPDK is using in embedded boxes too
where performance has
more weight than ABI stuff. I think we need to focus first on slow
path APIs ABI stuff.
I spend a few cycles to apply this patch +
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-February/158586.html
on top of the tree, there are a lot of conflicts. If I get a mergeable
patch then I will test it on an arm64 box.
>
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8160 CPU @ 2.10GHz
> ring_perf_autotest (without patch/with patch)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-25 21:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-20 16:41 Konstantin Ananyev
2020-03-20 17:54 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-03-21 1:03 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-03-25 21:09 ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2020-03-26 0:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-03-26 8:04 ` Morten Brørup
2020-03-31 23:25 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-06-30 23:15 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-01 7:27 ` Morten Brørup
2020-07-01 12:21 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-01 14:11 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-01 14:31 ` David Marchand
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=CALBAE1OuOwpQhSX9rKSKUy6BdypcCBWnYWuxR8ioAo4YXT-LFw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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).