From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 03/10] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix crypto-op might never get dequeued
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2019 15:06:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258010D8C04A9@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b57e49e2-b26a-eff7-1657-4b2f9a9528b8@nxp.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2019 1:51 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 03/10] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix crypto-op might never get dequeued
>
>
>
> On 1/2/2019 7:13 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/28/2018 9:03 PM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> >>> In some cases crypto-ops could never be dequeued from the crypto-device.
> >>> The easiest way to reproduce:
> >>> start ipsec-secgw with crypto-dev and send to it less then 32 packets.
> >>> none packets will be forwarded.
> >>> Reason for that is that the application does dequeue() from crypto-queues
> >>> only when new packets arrive.
> >>> This patch makes sure it calls dequeue() on a regular basis.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: c64278c0c18b ("examples/ipsec-secgw: rework processing loop")
> >>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c | 136 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>> examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c | 60 ++++++++-----
> >>> examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h | 11 +++
> >>> 3 files changed, 165 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
> >> [snip]
> >>> +
> >>> /* main processing loop */
> >>> static int32_t
> >>> main_loop(__attribute__((unused)) void *dummy)
> >>> @@ -866,7 +958,8 @@ main_loop(__attribute__((unused)) void *dummy)
> >>> diff_tsc = cur_tsc - prev_tsc;
> >>>
> >>> if (unlikely(diff_tsc > drain_tsc)) {
> >>> - drain_buffers(qconf);
> >>> + drain_tx_buffers(qconf);
> >>> + drain_crypto_buffers(qconf);
> >>> prev_tsc = cur_tsc;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -880,6 +973,9 @@ main_loop(__attribute__((unused)) void *dummy)
> >>> if (nb_rx > 0)
> >>> process_pkts(qconf, pkts, nb_rx, portid);
> >>> }
> >>> +
> >>> + drain_inbound_crypto_queues(qconf, &qconf->inbound);
> >>> + drain_outbound_crypto_queues(qconf, &qconf->outbound);
> >> drain_inbound_crypto_queues and drain_outbound_crypto_queues should be called based on diff_tsc.
> >> moving these two lines above after drain_crypto_buffers will improve the performance drop caused due to this patch.
> > Thanks, good to know.
> > To make what you suggest above to work properly with non-legacy mode ('-l') extra changes
> > would be needed...
> What changes do you see?
Non-legacy mode relies on a drain_crypto_queues() to dequeuer crypto-ops.
It doesn't do that as part of process_pkts().
It is doable, but it means I have to rework my patches a bit.
> > Do you have an idea - what exactly causing a slowdown?
> > Just an extra function calls (drain_inbound_crypto_queues/ drain_outbound_crypto_queues)?
> > Or is that because we do dequeue() from crypto PMD more often then before?
> I have not profiled it, but it should be because of more dequeues. On a
> single call to dequeue, a burst of packets get dequeued. but now there
> will be a lot more dequeues which have lesser packets than the burst
> size which will deteriorate the performance as it would be wasting the
> dequeue cycles.
>
> This patch is causing around 5% drop out of the 10% that I mentioned in
> the other mail.
> With the change that I suggested, I am almost able to get back those 5%.
Great, any idea what causing other 5%?
Konstantin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-02 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1544805623-18150-2-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
2018-12-28 15:33 ` [dpdk-stable] " Konstantin Ananyev
2019-01-02 11:44 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Akhil Goyal
2019-01-02 13:43 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-01-02 13:50 ` Akhil Goyal
2019-01-02 15:06 ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2018-12-28 15:33 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 04/10] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix outbound codepath for single SA Konstantin Ananyev
2018-12-28 15:33 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 05/10] examples/ipsec-secgw: make local variables static Konstantin Ananyev
2018-12-28 15:33 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 06/10] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix inbound SA checking Konstantin Ananyev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258010D8C04A9@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).