From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB564A046B for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:16:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D59B37B0; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:16:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BFDC2AB for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:16:34 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Jun 2019 07:16:33 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,427,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="183693787" Received: from vmedvedk-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.98]) ([10.237.220.98]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jun 2019 07:16:31 -0700 To: Honnappa Nagarahalli , Stephen Hemminger , "Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)" Cc: "bruce.richardson@intel.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" , nd References: <20190627093751.7746-1-ruifeng.wang@arm.com> <20190627082451.56719392@hermes.lan> <20190627213450.30082af6@hermes.lan> From: "Medvedkin, Vladimir" Message-ID: <185e012d-6f8a-66be-dc8c-a420065660fb@intel.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:16:30 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] lib/lpm: not inline unnecessary functions X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Honnappa, On 28/06/2019 14:57, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On 28/06/2019 05:34, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 02:44:54 +0000 >>> "Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)" wrote: >>> >>>>>> Tests showed that the function inlining caused performance drop on >>>>>> some x86 platforms with the memory ordering patches applied. >>>>>> By force no-inline functions, the performance was better than >>>>>> before on x86 and no impact to arm64 platforms. >>>>>> >>>>>> Suggested-by: Medvedkin Vladimir >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu >>>>> { >>>>> >>>>> Do you actually need to force noinline or is just taking of inline enough? >>>>> In general, letting compiler decide is often best practice. >>>> The force noinline is an optimization for x86 platforms to keep >>>> rte_lpm_add() API performance with memory ordering applied. >>> I don't think you answered my question. What does a recent version of >>> GCC do if you drop the inline. >>> >>> Actually all the functions in rte_lpm should drop inline. >> I'm agree with Stephen. If it is not a fastpath and size of function is not >> minimal it is good to remove inline qualifier for other control plane functions >> such as rule_add/delete/find/etc and let the compiler decide to inline it >> (unless it affects performance). > IMO, the rule needs to be simple. If it is control plane function, we should leave it to the compiler to decide. I do not think we need to worry too much about performance for control plane functions. Control plane is not as important as data plane speed but it is still important. For lpm we are talking not about initialization, but runtime routes add/del related functions. If it is very slow the library will be totally unusable because after it receives a route update it will be blocked for a long time and route update queue would overflow. >>> diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c index >>> 6b7b28a2e431..ffe07e980864 100644 >>> --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c >>> +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c >>> @@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ MAP_STATIC_SYMBOL(void rte_lpm_free(struct >> rte_lpm *lpm), >>> * are stored in the rule table from 0 - 31. >>> * NOTE: Valid range for depth parameter is 1 .. 32 inclusive. >>> */ >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> rule_add_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t >> depth, >>> uint8_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -471,7 +471,7 @@ rule_add_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t >> ip_masked, uint8_t depth, >>> return rule_index; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> rule_add_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth, >>> uint32_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ rule_add_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t >> ip_masked, uint8_t depth, >>> * Delete a rule from the rule table. >>> * NOTE: Valid range for depth parameter is 1 .. 32 inclusive. >>> */ >>> -static inline void >>> +static void >>> rule_delete_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, int32_t rule_index, uint8_t >> depth) >>> { >>> int i; >>> @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ rule_delete_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, int32_t >> rule_index, uint8_t depth) >>> lpm->rule_info[depth - 1].used_rules--; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline void >>> +static void >>> rule_delete_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, int32_t rule_index, uint8_t depth) >>> { >>> int i; >>> @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ rule_delete_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, int32_t >> rule_index, uint8_t depth) >>> * Finds a rule in rule table. >>> * NOTE: Valid range for depth parameter is 1 .. 32 inclusive. >>> */ >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> rule_find_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t >> depth) >>> { >>> uint32_t rule_gindex, last_rule, rule_index; @@ -618,7 +618,7 @@ >>> rule_find_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> rule_find_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth) >>> { >>> uint32_t rule_gindex, last_rule, rule_index; @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ >>> rule_find_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth) >>> /* >>> * Find, clean and allocate a tbl8. >>> */ >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> tbl8_alloc_v20(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry_v20 *tbl8) >>> { >>> uint32_t group_idx; /* tbl8 group index. */ @@ -669,7 +669,7 @@ >>> tbl8_alloc_v20(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry_v20 *tbl8) >>> return -ENOSPC; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> tbl8_alloc_v1604(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry *tbl8, uint32_t number_tbl8s) >>> { >>> uint32_t group_idx; /* tbl8 group index. */ @@ -709,7 +709,7 @@ >>> tbl8_free_v1604(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry *tbl8, uint32_t tbl8_group_start) >>> tbl8[tbl8_group_start].valid_group = INVALID; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> add_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> uint8_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -777,7 +777,7 @@ add_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, >> uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> add_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> uint32_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ add_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, >> uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> add_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >> uint8_t depth, >>> uint8_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -971,7 +971,7 @@ add_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, >> uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t depth, >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> add_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, uint8_t >> depth, >>> uint32_t next_hop) >>> { >>> @@ -1244,7 +1244,7 @@ >> BIND_DEFAULT_SYMBOL(rte_lpm_is_rule_present, _v1604, 16.04); >>> MAP_STATIC_SYMBOL(int rte_lpm_is_rule_present(struct rte_lpm *lpm, >> uint32_t ip, >>> uint8_t depth, uint32_t *next_hop), >>> rte_lpm_is_rule_present_v1604); >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> find_previous_rule_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t >> depth, >>> uint8_t *sub_rule_depth) >>> { >>> @@ -1266,7 +1266,7 @@ find_previous_rule_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 >> *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> return -1; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> find_previous_rule_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> uint8_t *sub_rule_depth) >>> { >>> @@ -1288,7 +1288,7 @@ find_previous_rule_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, >> uint32_t ip, uint8_t depth, >>> return -1; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> delete_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >>> uint8_t depth, int32_t sub_rule_index, uint8_t sub_rule_depth) >>> { >>> @@ -1381,7 +1381,7 @@ delete_depth_small_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 >> *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> delete_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >>> uint8_t depth, int32_t sub_rule_index, uint8_t sub_rule_depth) >>> { >>> @@ -1483,7 +1483,7 @@ delete_depth_small_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, >> uint32_t ip_masked, >>> * Return of value > -1 means tbl8 is in use but has all the same values and >>> * thus can be recycled >>> */ >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> tbl8_recycle_check_v20(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry_v20 *tbl8, >>> uint32_t tbl8_group_start) >>> { >>> @@ -1530,7 +1530,7 @@ tbl8_recycle_check_v20(struct >> rte_lpm_tbl_entry_v20 *tbl8, >>> return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> tbl8_recycle_check_v1604(struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry *tbl8, >>> uint32_t tbl8_group_start) >>> { >>> @@ -1577,7 +1577,7 @@ tbl8_recycle_check_v1604(struct >> rte_lpm_tbl_entry *tbl8, >>> return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> delete_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >>> uint8_t depth, int32_t sub_rule_index, uint8_t sub_rule_depth) >>> { >>> @@ -1655,7 +1655,7 @@ delete_depth_big_v20(struct rte_lpm_v20 *lpm, >> uint32_t ip_masked, >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static inline int32_t >>> +static int32_t >>> delete_depth_big_v1604(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, >>> uint8_t depth, int32_t sub_rule_index, uint8_t sub_rule_depth) >>> { >> -- >> Regards, >> Vladimir -- Regards, Vladimir