From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com (mail-wi0-f176.google.com
 [209.85.212.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622E28D96
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 23:29:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wicge5 with SMTP id ge5so1664495wic.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization
 :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding:content-type;
 bh=QOVIGDI54xg0VmIidQ3J8zB8BJpfRNmCyrDIeipgAOQ=;
 b=Z3RSg1a1EnzNaX4wqphCLFXkZV0N1Fzgj37Gy+EqzAuU/qADdSLdGUVPUU+V9Bkoqp
 C7HGz2E6acb4JszEToVcPqy8DzN5lA6mAAiR+uGG1QxcFGXhPGmGiFTlcgnOGd2uwJL6
 I01TmgBSbQMq/YL6MTBJaxEdC+euLBKWQ7AeBgCyRT8CvqmDZtfLjHb+fPbi6DWtqism
 d2BNTLOzHkyKU89NyKZOdrs851hN610rZYkBb6RbljMWHt/iqa0w/orBm2/StLBMCU7X
 26slFhFX0ezCbi0PYE/9WfujO9qNLqMlmLGP8VEy37StPXOqFpqpT/l6YmuWK2LW3Zq5
 0WNQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl+x93ATbDKzQxm0WI6Kad52CRFj5W3ZXBJTFtKBVwIhuN8BpO1qPtRRhLF3E9jBMStRN+c
X-Received: by 10.180.88.37 with SMTP id bd5mr13271222wib.82.1443130162178;
 Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p1sm136655wif.7.2015.09.24.14.29.21
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 23:28:15 +0200
Message-ID: <1510891.FFAirmlrxl@xps13>
Organization: 6WIND
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAKy9EB3YkqsF5A6KcK+vMN0oLSjXWLsmJ8kwoAzsiiDiWPuMLA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKy9EB3YkqsF5A6KcK+vMN0oLSjXWLsmJ8kwoAzsiiDiWPuMLA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Missing prefetch in non-vector rx function
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 21:29:22 -0000

Hi,

2015-09-24 22:10, Arnon Warshavsky:
> Moving from dpdk 1.5 to 2.0 we observed a PPS performance degradation of
> ~30%.
> After chasing this one for a while we found the problem:
> 
> A) Between the 2 versions rte_mbuf was increased in size from 1 to 2 cache
> lines.
> B) The standard (non-vector)  rx function does not perform a prefetch for
> the 2nd cache line of the mbuf (I see this bug exists in 2.1 as well) and
> it touches it setting the next pointer to NULL.
> I tested it in ixgbe, but it looks like it exists in all drivers in the
> *_rx_recv_pkts() and *_rx_recv_scattered_pkts() functions.
> Once added the prefetch for the 2nd line, we were back in our previous
> numbers.
> 
> I believe this one slipped under the radar as the vector mode is now the
> default.
> We stumbled into it because we work in non-vector mode due to a different
> mempool bug in 2.0 which sometimes crashes the application upon port stop.

Big thanks for this double bug report!

> I have 2 questions
> 1)
> Could anyone tell if the regression tests are comparing performance while
> building DPDK with the default set of flags alone, or are multiple options
> examined?

There is no official regression test of performance.
Though Intel is probably monitoring it for their hardware.

By the way, it would be a good improvement to have such standard benchmark
in DTS or elsewhere.

> 2)
> How are issues like that being tracked and later associated to a patch?

In general, it is followed by discussion and a patch on this mailing list.
The patch must track the fixed issue in the release notes.
In order to give better exposure of current bugs we could instantiate a
bug tracker. I think it's time to think about it seriously. Let's discuss
about the possible solutions in another thread.

Thanks again to you and all the Qwilt team.
PS: it would be nice to hear about your DPDK deployment and results