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 0931246AE5; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 14:59:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C6E40267; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 14:59:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pj1-f42.google.com (mail-pj1-f42.google.com [209.85.216.42]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E79D40264 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 14:59:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pj1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-313a188174fso784161a91.1 for ; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 05:59:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1751547540; x=1752152340; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6U4nlvaOCUaM5ctLlX/ZepjuP3OueRWjOc4PKlI/OCg=; b=KxexJZLNT7CtUa8cZg5QduD04i0aBLnm8DQdzKlyLXiyVw07YduDX62QpHTzO3ALkY AdBMQslFvciUXjNTn+Tm89Q34SurnSz5XFeIwFDPXZZAqtMA0oeU7cYDAUpjjGq7o7jV lHDcygcmLZgTrP4zAV9kz4OllrvM/fvLLgrA4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1751547540; x=1752152340; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=6U4nlvaOCUaM5ctLlX/ZepjuP3OueRWjOc4PKlI/OCg=; b=p75RV7UGrWGoWZIugn1KHvnYkmRGA6nAbpXIWakrBK9UIBHw/lbyP5yCj9n+lalm/u 4iZ0Ebiu9w9V7I0ZaxyFS2HZGzeLmsW/i6mFYQFvlfmF20Sw2FkGBKHxEsRg4eGlLTm2 5WfU0Po4tgGXHo0kIcWI/UNuzg5f7tL9+FIE5HYzdNRM4hex48w7+Uv3wJqkPMpsyhl6 l/T6s++X9bl9P2WwenZHpl36e6WldexbQUeayvnY27vdHhODPKKxna+Z5NhuljWm4GgG 5d2kFKqfawS+SBsWReWks2QYedgYt7p3vtx2sYtHf40vTgS7VfBlTIsmyYawXhsmUCFx 8nhA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVSW8hGv+Bsr6pkDAPXc3NaEQ8mrb3xPmxMnyabi71Xv+cNvDyResBoWUhoj7FAXGBr4Q==@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzmDq48zVJ5no+QPJ8MVJ0xBhb9IUY7uIZJiLsbWVnTCaSw1HMY 6bqYVow65uQnlkyBHShZmAW9EMdy4l2b6KSLdfCuv5ANQ1eP+C/L8S118O6qxsFv57vyf6+lOZO PiL10YsnZkF62WKgJ2MnHVlLe4DhbCUMg1zFqF2abNQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctMuLDZ/JUL7rt+rJazA6Ab3neUz3b2AWzmvFGpqOLVqTVg+1hzT/OihYlwl/u DsmRFJB4g3WDhzxI35hOwCpnklSdNqvJBL1e4g8jZ/M24hn71T8pcF6Hyk/cxgE31TS6E3OBCbF Iibq5lTPlyjMrYiuCswV4lVIS3E2LlNXG+J4/OLwIUaXb8hQjaYSCPVREyAts= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IESUv2aymapy95YQKW89YOuyMXwWez2hXr7NFHNTNQ+UlzXp3GjNK37IImu03MDrYwkSbt7u/6d9VIO6CdZaLk= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4fcc:b0:311:482a:f956 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-31a9f4f30b6mr2508285a91.5.1751547540142; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 05:59:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1A9A6C1A-B762-4295-BA5B-E3FB6DE10EB8@arm.com> In-Reply-To: From: Patrick Robb Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 08:53:23 -0400 X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXyqijeoXVKKsScbYzj-BMgIQgwVKDy7OeDIVLM4Shh6V0DYECCuApam6WE Message-ID: Subject: Re: Intel E810 Performance Regression - ARM Grace Server To: "Richardson, Bruce" Cc: "Nagarahalli, Honnappa" , Manit Mahajan , "Burakov, Anatoly" , "ci@dpdk.org" , Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage , Paul Szczepanek Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f0149d063905f019" X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org --000000000000f0149d063905f019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Bruce, Manit can identify the specific commit this morning. You raise a good point about the descriptor count. It is worth us assessing the performance with a broader set of descriptor counts and deciding what set of test configurations will yield helpful results for developers going forward. By my understanding, we want to test with a set of descriptor counts which are basically appropriate for the given traffic flow, not the other way around. We will gather more info this morning and share it back to you. On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 4:43=E2=80=AFAM Richardson, Bruce wrote: > Hi Manit, > > Can you identify which patch exactly within the series is causing the > regression? We were not expecting performance to change with the patchset= , > but obviously something got missed. > I will follow up on our end to see if we see any regressions. > > I must say, though, that 512 entries is pretty small rings sizes to use > for 100G traffic. The slightest stall would cause those rings to overflow= . > What is perf like at other ring sizes, e.g. 1k or 2k? > > /Bruce > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Honnappa Nagarahalli > > Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2025 8:03 AM > > To: Manit Mahajan > > Cc: Burakov, Anatoly ; ci@dpdk.org; > Richardson, > > Bruce ; Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage > > ; Paul Szczepanek > > > > Subject: Re: Intel E810 Performance Regression - ARM Grace Server > > > > + Wathsala, Paul > > > > > On Jul 2, 2025, at 10:09=E2=80=AFPM, Manit Mahajan > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi we have an update about the single core forwarding test on the ARM > > Grace server with the E810 100G Ice card. There was an intel PMDs serie= s > that > > was merged a week ago which had some performance failures when it was > > going through the CI: > > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/01c94afcb0b1c2795c031afc8 > > 72a8faf3f0db2b5.1749229651.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com/ > > > > > > and: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2025-June/883654.html > > > > > > As you can see it causes roughly a 6% decrease in packets forwarded i= n > the > > single core forwarding test with 64Byte frames and 512 txd/rxd. The del= ta > > tolerance on the single core forwarding test is 5%, so a 6% reduction i= n > MPPS > > forwarded is a failure. > > > > > > This was merged into mainline 6 days ago, which is why some failures > started > > to come in this week for the E810 Grace test. > > > > > > To double check this, on DPDK I checked out to: > > > > > > test/event: fix event vector adapter timeouts > > (2eca0f4cd5daf6cd54b8705f6f76f3003c923912) which directly precedes the > > Intel PMD patchseries, and ran the test and it forwarded the > pre-regression > > MPPS that we expected. > > > > > > Then I checked out to net/intel: add common Tx mbuf recycle > > (f5fd081c86ae415515ab55cbacf10c9c50536ca1) > > > > > > and I ran the test and it had the 6% reduction in MPPS forwarded. > > > > > > Another thing to note is that regrettably the ARM Grace E810 test did > not get > > run on the v7 (the final version) of this series, which meant the > failure was not > > displayed on that version and that's probably why it was merged. We wil= l > look > > back into our job history and see why this test failed to report. > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions about the test, the > testbed > > environment info, or anything else. > > Thanks Manit for looking into this. Adding few folks from Arm to follow > up. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Manit Mahajan > > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, > > please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents t= o > any > > other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information > in any > > medium. Thank you. > --000000000000f0149d063905f019 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Bruce,

Manit can identify the specif= ic commit this morning.

You raise a good point abo= ut the descriptor count. It is worth us assessing the performance with a br= oader set of descriptor counts and deciding what set of test configurations= will yield helpful results for developers going forward. By my understandi= ng, we want to test with a set of descriptor counts which are basically app= ropriate for the given traffic flow, not the other way around. We will gath= er more info this morning and share it back to you.

On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 4:43=E2=80=AFAM Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrot= e:
Hi Manit,

Can you identify which patch exactly within the series is causing the regre= ssion? We were not expecting performance to change with the patchset, but o= bviously something got missed.
I will follow up on our end to see if we see any regressions.

I must say, though, that 512 entries is pretty small rings sizes to use for= 100G traffic. The slightest stall would cause those rings to overflow. Wha= t is perf like at other ring sizes, e.g. 1k or 2k?

/Bruce


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2025 8:03 AM
> To: Manit Mahajan <mmahajan@iol.unh.edu>
> Cc: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; ci@dpdk.org; Richardson,
> Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage
> <wa= thsala.vithanage@arm.com>; Paul Szczepanek
> <Paul.= Szczepanek@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: Intel E810 Performance Regression - ARM Grace Server
>
> + Wathsala, Paul
>
> > On Jul 2, 2025, at 10:09=E2=80=AFPM, Manit Mahajan <mmahajan@iol.unh.edu>= ;
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi we have an update about the single core forwarding test on the= ARM
> Grace server with the E810 100G Ice card. There was an intel PMDs seri= es that
> was merged a week ago which had some performance failures when it was<= br> > going through the CI:
> https://patches.dpdk.org/p= roject/dpdk/patch/01c94afcb0b1c2795c031afc8
> 72a8faf3f0db2b5.1749229651.git.= anatoly.burakov@intel.com/
> >
> > and: http://mails.dpdk.org= /archives/test-report/2025-June/883654.html
> >
> > As you can see it causes roughly a 6% decrease in packets forward= ed in the
> single core forwarding test with 64Byte frames and 512 txd/rxd. The de= lta
> tolerance on the single core forwarding test is 5%, so a 6% reduction = in MPPS
> forwarded is a failure.
> >
> > This was merged into mainline 6 days ago, which is why some failu= res started
> to come in this week for the E810 Grace test.
> >
> > To double check this, on DPDK I checked out to:
> >
> > test/event: fix event vector adapter timeouts
> (2eca0f4cd5daf6cd54b8705f6f76f3003c923912) which directly precedes the=
> Intel PMD patchseries, and ran the test and it forwarded the pre-regre= ssion
> MPPS that we expected.
> >
> > Then I checked out to net/intel: add common Tx mbuf recycle
> (f5fd081c86ae415515ab55cbacf10c9c50536ca1)
> >
> > and I ran the test and it had the 6% reduction in MPPS forwarded.=
> >
> > Another thing to note is that regrettably the ARM Grace E810 test= did not get
> run on the v7 (the final version) of this series, which meant the fail= ure was not
> displayed on that version and that's probably why it was merged. W= e will look
> back into our job history and see why this test failed to report.
> >
> > Please let me know if you have any questions about the test, the = testbed
> environment info, or anything else.
> Thanks Manit for looking into this. Adding few folks from Arm to follo= w up.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Manit Mahajan
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended r= ecipient,
> please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents = to any
> other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information= in any
> medium. Thank you.
--000000000000f0149d063905f019--