From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Received: from mail-yw0-f172.google.com (mail-yw0-f172.google.com
 [209.85.161.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19C1B4BE1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 10 May 2017 04:39:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-yw0-f172.google.com with SMTP id l14so9495559ywk.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 09 May 2017 19:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=rD0L2JuONkn+JW6DyWOOpqKQqGoWgYtU2G+pyVVzaBQ=;
 b=aEuowVHKCJ4bBHtg0ioxLWdK5GE2lC0301WcWNFPt4QYL9mwjViA1sSuosA+ym8IFK
 4KEfW2Nn+FzYTjAtrxrDdKotRMxNJIa9C48dh463snqPtNZp60U1kGLX7bB0DV92BVfY
 zRPtVxqD8gZJ0k6SK8NvtipHO3V8vY2FH9QCQ=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=rD0L2JuONkn+JW6DyWOOpqKQqGoWgYtU2G+pyVVzaBQ=;
 b=TT/zFipeisFEAA1MPZz3lW8OXMlSe3AX//FPutZVh6JdbdDjGdAR50cXTQKU/8q1iO
 xVPZscOAH7yAqLORaTaniszhIPuW86LH5s0FU6xG7+m6qjK29rd0lUjmWKYq6UT8fcfu
 YbXozBcafW0O76bYWTL29Ryv1g32hyK9ny/lhHsnHUmsEKpLZphgaLOMDFT6rr0WWHP9
 GJTVsMIeuL/XxtKlK1UyM9XTyITNTsMqT3bRoPuBhVKVw3Imu/2GCEMxu02NZI5nhLR0
 a+CFejcut3+iJerKXpUCnj0+z5v/M4U8oPog1ZZcdl8hYgg/PFBwV7CiOFpUW/F9Ux6o
 1AIg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBUIMkQq6sjhycmlN/aLzNs9GYj1Ke2NbSEqeY7YP3RAOtdDIQ7
 FeszALzuYiUZVY1GL/GUXWtmAJNjVMLL
X-Received: by 10.129.82.80 with SMTP id g77mr2845480ywb.207.1494383959361;
 Tue, 09 May 2017 19:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.4.16 with HTTP; Tue, 9 May 2017 19:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1494317456.27491.2.camel@caviumnetworks.com>
References: <1493709255-8887-1-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
 <1493709255-8887-5-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
 <1493725624.3602.34.camel@caviumnetworks.com>
 <CAP4Qi3_YFeV33_D5zv0hDBAMtVW0kbzkY0qx18CTC_ygLcNWZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP4Qi385shUj9ZZHCWS3iPU9F540_a7_Brn8wey+ZmpW1xiiJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1493958263.10283.0.camel@caviumnetworks.com>
 <CAP4Qi3-KoYH2Qs1u4JP5biv4rezYNnhgEwoKrtf+9cfQwxG9Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1494317456.27491.2.camel@caviumnetworks.com>
From: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 10:39:18 +0800
Message-ID: <CAP4Qi3_SoVs1TXx=vipCmOFBS2o3HVE3fUkaH2NEN2NT9JRV+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Sekhar, Ashwin" <Ashwin.Sekhar@cavium.com>
Cc: "Jacob, Jerin" <Jerin.JacobKollanukkaran@cavium.com>, 
 "tomasz.kantecki@intel.com" <tomasz.kantecki@intel.com>,
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] examples/l3fwd: add neon support for
	l3fwd
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 02:39:20 -0000

Hi Ashwin,

On 9 May 2017 at 16:10, Sekhar, Ashwin <Ashwin.Sekhar@cavium.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 13:43 +0800, Jianbo Liu wrote:
>> On 5 May 2017 at 12:24, Sekhar, Ashwin <Ashwin.Sekhar@cavium.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 16:42 +0800, Jianbo Liu wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Ashwin,
>> > >
>> > > On 3 May 2017 at 13:24, Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi Ashwin,
>> > > >
>> > > > On 2 May 2017 at 19:47, Sekhar, Ashwin <Ashwin.Sekhar@cavium.co
>> > > > m>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi Jianbo,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I tested your neon changes on thunderx. I am seeing a
>> > > > > performance
>> > > > > regression of ~10% for LPM case and ~20% for EM case with
>> > > > > your
>> > > > > changes.
>> > > > > Did you see improvement on any arm64 platform with these
>> > > > > changes.
>> > > > > If
>> > > > > yes, how much was the improvement?
>> > > > Thanks for your reviewing and testing.
>> > > > For some reason, I have not done much with the performance
>> > > > testing.
>> > > > I'll send a new version later after tuning the performance.
>> > > >
>> > > Can you tell me how did you test?
>> > Built with following commands.
>> > make config T=arm64-thunderx-linuxapp-gcc
>> > make -j32
>> >
>> > Tested LPM with
>> > sudo ./examples/l3fwd/build/l3fwd -l 9,10  --master-lcore 9  -- -p
>> > 0x1 --config="(0,0,10)"
>> >
>> > Tested EM with
>> > sudo ./examples/l3fwd/build/l3fwd -l 9,10  --master-lcore 9  -- -p
>> > 0x1 --config="(0,0,10)" -E
>> >
>> Only one port? What's the network topology, and lpm/em rules? How did
>> you stress traffic...?
> port - 1 topology: DUT connected back to back to traffic generator.
>
> We are using the default rules in the C code. flow generation is:
> src.ip.min 192.168.18.1
> src.ip.max 192.168.18.90
> src.ip.inc 1
>
> Also, Please let us know the topology that you are using.

I used two ports with one rule to forward packets from one to the other.
Sent v2, please try this new version.

Thanks!
Jianbo