From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A34A0562;
Sat, 4 Apr 2020 03:47:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6D82B89;
Sat, 4 Apr 2020 03:47:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from inbox.dpdk.org (xvm-172-178.dc0.ghst.net [95.142.172.178])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016F13B5
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat, 4 Apr 2020 03:47:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 33)
id C2B6AA057B; Sat, 4 Apr 2020 03:47:54 +0200 (CEST)
From: bugzilla@dpdk.org
To: dev@dpdk.org
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2020 01:47:54 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: DPDK
X-Bugzilla-Component: testpmd
X-Bugzilla-Version: 20.02
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: cfb@hpe.com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dev@dpdk.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version rep_platform
op_sys bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-435-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [Bug 435] Proposed improvement to non-interactive loop
timing
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D435
Bug ID: 435
Summary: Proposed improvement to non-interactive loop timing
Product: DPDK
Version: 20.02
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: Normal
Component: testpmd
Assignee: dev@dpdk.org
Reporter: cfb@hpe.com
Target Milestone: ---
When running testpmd in non-interactive mode, and using a stats period valu=
e,
the current loop delay is less than ideal.
The current code:
if (stats_period !=3D 0) {
uint64_t prev_time =3D 0, cur_time, diff_time =3D 0;
uint64_t timer_period;
/* Convert to number of cycles */
timer_period =3D stats_period * rte_get_timer_hz();
while (f_quit =3D=3D 0) {
cur_time =3D rte_get_timer_cycles();
diff_time +=3D cur_time - prev_time;
if (diff_time >=3D timer_period) {
print_stats();
/* Reset the timer */
diff_time =3D 0;
}
/* Sleep to avoid unnecessary checks */
prev_time =3D cur_time;
sleep(1);
}
}
Compares the difference in time, and if the time has not expired, will sleep
for one second before checking again. The problem with this is when the
difference is close, but not at the timer period. This will result in an
additional second being added to the update period. (e.g. a one second peri=
od
becomes almost 2 seconds.)
Ideally, the sleep value would be based on the amount of time left (cur_tim=
e -
prev_time).
Using usleep(), it is possible to create delays that are closer to the desi=
red
delay.
The following code appears to work for me, and takes into account the time
required for the print_stats() call, but there may be a better solution:
if (stats_period !=3D 0) {
uint64_t cur_time, ticks_per_usec;
uint64_t timer_period;
/* Convert to number of usecs */
timer_period =3D stats_period * 1000000;
/* How many CPU ticks per usec */
ticks_per_usec =3D rte_get_timer_hz() / 1000000;
while (f_quit =3D=3D 0) {
/* Get the current CPU ticks */
cur_time =3D rte_get_timer_cycles();
print_stats();
/* Get the tick count again and sleep for t=
he
difference */
usleep(timer_period - (rte_get_timer_cycles=
() -
cur_time) / ticks_per_usec);
}
}
--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=