From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91999A0547 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:36:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6F54003F; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:36:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com (mail-wr1-f51.google.com [209.85.221.51]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81BD4003F for <stable@dpdk.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:36:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id b13so273299wrs.3 for <stable@dpdk.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 05:36:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=k6gSaBsXfDFak4/390C4SYCMw/so26F1AROFGkZfzFs=; b=HHp5cyDRyLYy/mQ+GePVagycsSutTzLcNEH0vLK5uA3OfS8fws8rx6Jikf7f8oTq8k fRAGT8wPaWNj4ws1ekSPvH6HnY1rqSX1n23JCsdKmd20njyokvhQAg47avvQ6fOsZlmP JxF5L9gRUG14buYOOy4m4JLW4Du26+qV2/JNdqz8GiiIyrhlPrCd6glA5FH37ZMCyxbB 9Q2J+wMjSyb4Uf+V3Ft6rdkYA5FLSnAM1bbnwSV+AYwsYNTzCHV8K/JQmLQhn/flxIp3 tVxgYW5GJrMFH6HXXeOkuPuJ6Tik1SlnGS1/0/cbhddz0VNE5nOESHEAL3x6GFCnM4/b PmlQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=k6gSaBsXfDFak4/390C4SYCMw/so26F1AROFGkZfzFs=; b=rtl7UihYVA718P1Xam1YdcurGlhZoxK9YTAGYCVnhUMmbTUXbCJfkh/l9A+2dx49j+ HjtqxEnV7sQo1R98B/OIIi6mUMkRZcDzI8cXhy3UPAaq1dmOjFSccbHUNuxBI8PwgShl t+PfsxhZl4QwcyJvycXVC6aVKGPL/JKqjMDxDFNdHW3DFVkpYjheRZO3H34xThZxlXfi LrZm4w3BXWpYgbAVQ8x092kEmaJTYsUo2+rZ7orChTB9CqH7inqdo2uPwxS/LIEAmU1l RLLgd23Rw62SPruo7JDyBbYlFKPZYwAObAc+HSo0nP6C2R+R/XywLuha5H0NvHGNIaQX tLaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533l8k45/tcGvJ4zxzoJjIi55bAy0jgyUVcc6ITEY8opOlrVuguw UbKR+nuJwWrC64mSMcaPsM7ypQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwSZCWAd4sxnPThZgySn1Eo2o+LbCVDXy4pkY7DcvoljF3TkvKKPfsOww6SjNArF+PwocpSSg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a287:: with SMTP id s7mr2802197wra.120.1627648610363; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 05:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com ([2a01:e0a:5ac:6460:c065:401d:87eb:9b25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l9sm1564276wro.92.2021.07.30.05.36.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 30 Jul 2021 05:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:36:48 +0200 From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> Cc: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>, David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>, Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@nvidia.com>, Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>, dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "zhaoyan.chen@intel.com" <zhaoyan.chen@intel.com>, Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, Morten =?iso-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>, "ajitkhaparde@gmail.com" <ajitkhaparde@gmail.com>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>, Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com> Message-ID: <YQPyYAxwirEtEN2N@platinum> References: <20201104170007.8026-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <20210119083226.GA2855@platinum> <DM6PR12MB375341639BF91CB416CF88ECDFA30@DM6PR12MB3753.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> <3026375.dAcfTszmW5@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3026375.dAcfTszmW5@thomas> Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] mbuf: fix reset on mbuf free X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>, <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/> List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>, <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org> Hi Thomas, On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:47:34AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > What's the follow-up for this patch? Unfortunatly, I still don't have the time to work on this topic yet. In my initial tests, in our lab, I didn't notice any performance regression, but Ali has seen an impact (0.5M PPS, but I don't know how much in percent). > 19/01/2021 15:04, Slava Ovsiienko: > > Hi, All > > > > Could we postpose this patch at least to rc2? We would like to conduct more investigations? > > > > With best regards, Slava > > > > From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 05:52:32PM +0000, Ali Alnubani wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > (Sorry had to resend this to some recipients due to mail server problems). > > > > > > > > Just confirming that I can still reproduce the regression with single core and > > > 64B frames on other servers. > > > > > > Many thanks for the feedback. Can you please detail what is the amount of > > > performance loss in percent, and confirm the test case? (I suppose it is > > > testpmd io forward). > > > > > > Unfortunatly, I won't be able to spend a lot of time on this soon (sorry for > > > that). So I see at least these 2 options: > > > > > > - postpone the patch again, until I can find more time to analyze > > > and optimize > > > - apply the patch if the performance loss is acceptable compared to > > > the added value of fixing a bug > > > > [...] Statu quo... Olivier > > > > > Assuming that pw86457 doesn't have an effect on this test, it looks > > > > > to me that this patch caused a regression in Intel hardware as well. > > > > > > > > > > Can someone update the baseline's expected values for the Intel NICs > > > > > and rerun the test on this patch? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Ali > > > >