Hi Bruce,
Thanks for highlighting the variance. We found this was an internal test bed configuration issue. We are sharing the next version of the same patch with updated numbers.
Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 05:45:57PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:On 7/16/2024 7:37 AM, Vipin Varghese wrote:Goal of the patch is to improve SSE macswap on x86_64 by reducing the stalls in backend engine. Original implementation of the SSE macswap makes loop call to multiple load, shuffle & store. Using SIMD ISA interleaving we can reduce the stalls for - load SSE token exhaustion - Shuffle and Load dependency Also other changes which improves packet per second are - Filling access to MBUF for offload flags which is separate cacheline, - using register keyword Build test using meson script: `````````````````````````````` build-gcc-static buildtools build-gcc-shared build-mini build-clang-static build-clang-shared build-x86-generic Test Results: ````````````` Platform-1: AMD EPYC SIENA 8594P @2.3GHz, no boost ------------------------------------------------ TEST IO 64B: baseline <NIC : MPPs> - mellanox CX-7 2*200Gbps : 42.0 - intel E810 1*100Gbps : 82.0 - intel E810 2*200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): 82.45 ------------------------------------------------ TEST MACSWAP 64B: <NIC : Before : After> - mellanox CX-7 2*200Gbps : 31.533 : 31.90 - intel E810 1*100Gbps : 50.380 : 47.0 - intel E810 2*200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): 48.840 : 49.827 ------------------------------------------------ TEST MACSWAP 128B: <NIC : Before: After> - mellanox CX-7 2*200Gbps: 30.946 : 31.770 - intel E810 1*100Gbps: 49.386 : 46.366 - intel E810 2*200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): 47.979 : 49.503 ------------------------------------------------ TEST MACSWAP 256B: <NIC: Before: After> - mellanox CX-7 2*200Gbps: 32.480 : 33.150 - intel E810 1 * 100Gbps: 45.29 : 44.571 - intel E810 2 * 200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): 45.033 : 45.117 ------------------------------------------------ Platform-2: AMD EPYC 9554 @3.1GHz, no boost ------------------------------------------------ TEST IO 64B: baseline <NIC : MPPs> - intel E810 2*200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): 82.49 ------------------------------------------------ <NIC intel E810 2*200Gbps (2CQ-DA2): Before : After> TEST MACSWAP: 1Q 1C1T 64B: : 45.0 : 45.54 128B: : 44.48 : 44.43 256B: : 42.0 : 41.99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ TEST MACSWAP: 2Q 2C2T 64B: : 59.5 : 60.55 128B: : 56.78 : 58.1 256B: : 41.85 : 41.99 ------------------------------------------------ Signed-off-by: Vipin Varghese <vipin.varghese@amd.com>Hi Bruce, John, Can you please help testing macswap performance with this patch on Intel platforms, to be sure it is not causing regression?Hi Ferruh, We can try and get some Intel numbers for you, but I think at this point it is better deferred to 24.11 due to lack of discussion and analysis of the numbers. This is because the numbers above already show that it is causing regressions - in fact many of the regressions are larger than the benefits shown. This may be acceptable, but it would imply that we shouldn't be too hasty in applying the patch. Regards, /Bruce