From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Sergey Vyazmitinov <s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com>, olivier.matz@6wind.com
Cc: konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org,
yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com, dev@dpdk.org, mirqus@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] kni: use bulk functions to allocate and free mbufs
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:04:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8b1922fa-f9c2-26c0-2179-ac26c9dbf762@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1484801219-1312-1-git-send-email-s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com>
On 1/19/2017 4:46 AM, Sergey Vyazmitinov wrote:
> Optimized kni_allocate_mbufs and kni_free_mbufs by using mbuf bulk functions
Hi Sergey,
Although I found this patch and its idea useful, performance test result
is showing a performance lose after this patch.
In my test setup [1] the performance drops from ~1.88Mpps to ~1.6Mpps.
What are your test results, are you observing a performance gain?
To analyze the test result, I split the kni patch into two, -it may be
good idea to split these in patchset too-, bulk free and bulk alloc.
It looks like bulk free does not make any difference. This may be
because bottleneck is somewhere else.
On the other hand, bulk alloc is causing the performance drop, but not
mainly because of using bulk mbuf alloc, instead because of alloc logic
modification.
It seems cost of checking free space of the fifo is more than allocating
a fix number of mbuf, fill fifo until it gets full and free remaining mbufs.
I will add more comment into patch itself, and I have another idea,
which looks like giving better result.
Thanks,
ferruh
[1]
- lo_mode_fifo_skb
- single kthread, binded to a core
- single port, connected to traffic generator
>
> Sergey Vyazmitinov (2):
> kni: add bulk function to free mbufs
> kni: Use bulk functions to allocate and free mbufs
>
> lib/librte_kni/rte_kni.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> lib/librte_kni/rte_kni_fifo.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++
> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-25 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-19 4:46 Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-19 4:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] kni: add bulk function to " Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-23 12:59 ` Olivier Matz
2017-01-23 13:19 ` Olivier Matz
2017-01-19 4:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/2] kni: Use bulk functions to allocate and " Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-25 20:10 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-25 19:04 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
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=8b1922fa-f9c2-26c0-2179-ac26c9dbf762@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=mirqus@gmail.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
/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).