From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB847424EE; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 11:32:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AFF402AF; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 11:32:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD37400EF for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 11:32:36 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1693819956; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=RHmLIhPV/uZmJdXuAUOT1GtHcBA+rVKhKHS6SmJrFl0=; b=REkh60b9NsSykM0ALULEJ5dI6Guyu2x5VvwMPxJF3zJlrr3zfBECldwckNlEYurv7stQFh m5viwYmuTLOemV+/K+Uq92ADaASmaeqxNWP98xDsGHW9W/iWgsUXhSSDDWNHPo9JOPMG6w txMhUKmlQgB7MTachMjAD66O+eJK5c4= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-352-fkZDgep3PcSI8edRKzfbJA-1; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 05:32:32 -0400 X-MC-Unique: fkZDgep3PcSI8edRKzfbJA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-402ccac9b1eso5447145e9.0 for ; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 02:32:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1693819951; x=1694424751; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:subject:from:references:cc:to :content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=RHmLIhPV/uZmJdXuAUOT1GtHcBA+rVKhKHS6SmJrFl0=; b=ZAHGreeehTT/CGb4RM1ThCU6ySysqkEBIG7zVEJqibF9DXAbN1tcJp6Rw2hj1fsPfS i4fAvlgGYISWH8VzRoKkzIMluHHubMmjowNHmDCQv3uPTvP9pxNXth/hx5iGnn79kcqL 6cuUEPTEsFiOJYmTX6qRY7Y7QhdEmy4pK1GnnzkLs/y2ND1rEueQG9Y21KesuV0zBzow hLipFppbtr+3iqmxJk14RiQYUKYdcCCRfAdYu115KqKMR+rGJm137NHK1NLR7sk4fR5i eCmIF+BlLJQHUz71eOJa35nUT2STftTDdRaxwN7ExQvQ/tC79amHzwZFeIpd5SeIF3em Hh1A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx+DvHVREu/i9tqqIcxXKznFtjMkSp+KA1QjPNI+tU/XjMbcBWh CJ/Z4XJb/tK1s8nFOM5cJxOElBiGXFUES5pjVkOvByk2m/iYpctGZBn6nS2CA08nD3UQqr57Tr3 fLGw= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7c05:0:b0:401:be70:53b6 with SMTP id x5-20020a1c7c05000000b00401be7053b6mr6776612wmc.15.1693819951633; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 02:32:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE21mmTwAwSFQ8y0yF1xHgNLTUDAtj86L+uGGCAaxnydx2lApGQ0KV1Mqpmocvb1NV49gCdcA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7c05:0:b0:401:be70:53b6 with SMTP id x5-20020a1c7c05000000b00401be7053b6mr6776583wmc.15.1693819951232; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 02:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.36] ([78.19.106.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z17-20020a7bc7d1000000b003fbdbd0a7desm16439832wmk.27.2023.09.04.02.32.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Sep 2023 02:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2023 10:32:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 To: "Zeng, ZhichaoX" , "Xu, HailinX" , Xueming Li , "stable@dpdk.org" , "Wu, Jingjing" , "Xing, Beilei" , "Xu, Ke1" , "Zhang, Qi Z" Cc: "xuemingl@nvdia.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Stokes, Ian" , "Mcnamara, John" , Luca Boccassi , "Xu, Qian Q" , Thomas Monjalon , "Peng, Yuan" , "Chen, Zhaoyan" References: <20230817061332.16248-1-xuemingl@nvidia.com> From: Kevin Traynor Subject: Re: 22.11.3 patches review and test In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 01/09/2023 04:23, Zeng, ZhichaoX wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kevin Traynor >> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 8:18 PM >> To: Xu, HailinX ; Xueming Li ; >> stable@dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing ; Xing, Beilei >> ; Xu, Ke1 ; Zeng, ZhichaoX >> ; Zhang, Qi Z >> Cc: xuemingl@nvdia.com; dev@dpdk.org; Stokes, Ian ; >> Mcnamara, John ; Luca Boccassi >> ; Xu, Qian Q ; Thomas Monjalon >> ; Peng, Yuan ; Chen, >> Zhaoyan >> Subject: Re: 22.11.3 patches review and test >> >> On 30/08/2023 17:25, Kevin Traynor wrote: >>> On 29/08/2023 09:22, Xu, HailinX wrote: >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Xueming Li >>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 2:14 PM >>>>> To: stable@dpdk.org >>>>> Cc: xuemingl@nvdia.com; dev@dpdk.org; Abhishek Marathe >>>>> ; Ali Alnubani ; >>>>> Walker, Benjamin ; David Christensen >>>>> ; Hemant Agrawal >> ; >>>>> Stokes, Ian ; Jerin Jacob >>>>> ; Mcnamara, John ; >>>>> Ju-Hyoung Lee ; Kevin Traynor >>>>> ; Luca Boccassi ; Pei Zhang >>>>> ; Xu, Qian Q ; Raslan >>>>> Darawsheh ; Thomas Monjalon >>>>> ; Yanghang Liu ; Peng, >>>>> Yuan ; Chen, Zhaoyan >> >>>>> Subject: 22.11.3 patches review and test >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Here is a list of patches targeted for stable release 22.11.3. >>>>> >>>>> The planned date for the final release is 31th August. >>>>> >>>>> Please help with testing and validation of your use cases and report >>>>> any issues/results with reply-all to this mail. For the final >>>>> release the fixes and reported validations will be added to the release >> notes. >>>>> >>>>> A release candidate tarball can be found at: >>>>> >>>>> https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/tag/?id=v22.11.3-rc1 >>>>> >>>>> These patches are located at branch 22.11 of dpdk-stable repo: >>>>> https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/ >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> We are conducting DPDK testing and have found two issues. >>>> >>>> 1. The startup speed of testpmd is significantly slower in the os of SUSE >>>> This issue fix patch has been merged into main, But it has not backported >> to 22.11.3. >>>> Fix patch commit id on DPDK main: >>>> 7e7b6762eac292e78c77ad37ec0973c0c944b845 >>>> >>>> 2. The SCTP tunnel packet of iavf cannot be forwarded in avx512 mode >> >> Need to clarify this sentence. It looks like it is not a functional bug where >> avx512 mode is selected and then an SCTP tunnel packet cannot be sent. >> Instead, it is a possible performance issue that avx512 mode will not be >> selected where it might have been due to unneeded additions >> (RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_*_TNL_TSO) to IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS. >> >> @IAVF maintainers - please confirm my analysis is correct ? >> >> In that case, as it is a possible performance issue in a specific case for a single >> driver I think it is non-critical for 21.11 and we can just revert the patch on the >> branch and wait for 21.11.6 release in December. > > Hi Kevin, > > Since the LTS version of the IAVF driver does not support avx512 checksum offload, > the scalar path should be selected, but this patch makes it incorrectly select the > avx512 path, and the SCTP tunnel packets can't be forwarded properly. > ok, let's take a look at the patch and usage. diff --git a/drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx.h b/drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx.h index 8d4a77271a..605ea3f824 100644 --- a/drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx.h +++ b/drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx.h @@ -32,4 +32,8 @@ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MULTI_SEGS | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_TSO | \ + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO | \ + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO | \ + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO | \ + RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY) So we now have: #define IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS ( \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_INSERT | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_INSERT | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MULTI_SEGS | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO | \ RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY) static inline int iavf_tx_vec_queue_default(struct iavf_tx_queue *txq) { if (!txq) return -1; if (txq->rs_thresh < IAVF_VPMD_TX_MAX_BURST || txq->rs_thresh > IAVF_VPMD_TX_MAX_FREE_BUF) return -1; if (txq->offloads & IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS) return -1; ^^^ Adding the extra bits to IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS gives *more* reasons for why this statement might not be true, so returning -1 indicating that vector cannot be used for tx queue static inline bool check_tx_vec_allow(struct iavf_tx_queue *txq) { if (!(txq->offloads & IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS) && ^^^ Adding the extra bits to IAVF_TX_NO_VECTOR_FLAGS gives *more* reason for this statement will be false and then false returned indicating that vector cannot be used. txq->rs_thresh >= IAVF_VPMD_TX_MAX_BURST && txq->rs_thresh <= IAVF_VPMD_TX_MAX_FREE_BUF) { PMD_INIT_LOG(DEBUG, "Vector tx can be enabled on this txq."); return true; } PMD_INIT_LOG(DEBUG, "Vector Tx cannot be enabled on this txq."); return false; } -- It looks like that adding the extra bits gives it less reasons to select vector mode. However, you are saying that this patch means there is a case where it now selects vector where it should not, meaning additional reason to select vector mode. So maybe I miss something ? > Yes, we can revert this commit for 21.11.6 release, thanks. > > Regards > Zhichao > >> thanks, >> Kevin. >> >>>> commit 9b7215f150d0bfc5cb00fce68ff08e5217c7f2b3 on v22.11.3- >> rc1. >>>> This commit is for the new feature (avx512 checksum offload) in DPDK >> 23.03, which should not be backported to the LTS version since avx512 >> checksum offload is not supported in v22.11.3 LTS. >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for flagging Xueming. >>> >>> The issue is that it was listed as fixing 059f18ae2aec ("net/iavf: add >>> offload path for Tx AVX512") which goes back to 21.05. >>> >>> This could have been avoided if the 'Fixes:' tag was correct, or if >>> the authors replied to the email about queued backports :/ >>> >>> Requesting iavf/next-net-intel maintainers to check Fixes: tags are >>> correct before merging. >>> >>> DPDK 21.11.5 is already released with this patch. Any idea why it did >>> not show up in validation for 21.11.5 ? Is it an issue for 21.11.5 ? >>> How critical is it ? >>> >>> I can revert it on the 21.11 branch, but it will need to wait until >>> 21.11.6 in December before it will be reverted in a released version. >>> >>> thanks, >>> Kevin. >>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Xu, Hailin >>>> >>> >