From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E137D234 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:13:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1YGuWu-0005V6-HB; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:13:34 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:13:26 -0500 From: Neil Horman To: "Wodkowski, PawelX" Message-ID: <20150129191326.GF1999@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1422532206-10662-1-git-send-email-pawelx.wodkowski@intel.com> <20150129132522.GA1999@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] new headroom stats library and example application X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:13:36 -0000 On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 05:10:36PM +0000, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman@tuxdriver.com] > > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 2:25 PM > > To: Wodkowski, PawelX > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] new headroom stats library and example > > application > > > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:50:04PM +0100, Pawel Wodkowski wrote: > > > Hi community, > > > I would like to introduce library for measuring load of some arbitrary jobs. It > > > can be used to profile every kind of job sets on any arbitrary execution unit. > > > In provided l2fwd-headroom example I demonstrate how to use this library to > > > profile packet forwarding (job set is froward, flush and stats) on LCores > > > (execution unit). This example does no limit possible schemes on which this > > > library can be used. > > > > > > Pawel Wodkowski (2): > > > librte_headroom: New library for checking core/system/app load > > > examples: introduce new l2fwd-headroom example > > > > > > config/common_bsdapp | 6 + > > > config/common_linuxapp | 6 + > > > examples/Makefile | 1 + > > > examples/l2fwd-headroom/Makefile | 51 +++ > > > examples/l2fwd-headroom/main.c | 875 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > lib/Makefile | 1 + > > > lib/librte_headroom/Makefile | 50 +++ > > > lib/librte_headroom/rte_headroom.c | 368 +++++++++++++++ > > > lib/librte_headroom/rte_headroom.h | 481 ++++++++++++++++++++ > > > mk/rte.app.mk | 4 + > > > 10 files changed, 1843 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 examples/l2fwd-headroom/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 examples/l2fwd-headroom/main.c > > > create mode 100644 lib/librte_headroom/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 lib/librte_headroom/rte_headroom.c > > > create mode 100644 lib/librte_headroom/rte_headroom.h > > > > > > -- > > > 1.7.9.5 > > > > > > > > > > Whats the advantage of this library over the other tools to preform the same > > function. > > Hi Neil, > > Good point, what is advantage over perf. Answer is: this library does not > supposed to be a perf competition and is not for profiling app in the way perf does. > It is an small and fast extension. It's main task is to manage job list to invoke > them exactly when needed and provide some basic stats about application idle > time (whatever programmer will consider the idle) and busy time. > > For example: > application might decide to add remove some jobs to/from LCore(s) dynamically > basing on current idle time (ex: move job from one core to another). > > Also application might have some information's about traffic type it handles > and provide own algorithm to calculate invocation time (it can also dynamically > switch between those algorithms only replacing handlers). > > > Perf can provide all the information in this library, and do so > > without having to directly modify the source for the execution unit under test > > Yes, perf can provide those information's but it can't handle the case when > you are poling for packets too fast or too slow and waist time getting only couple > of them. Library will adjust time when it execute job basing on value this job > returned previously. Code modifications are not so deep, as you can see comparing > l2wf vs l2fwd-headroom app. > > For example in application I introduced, when forward job return less than > MAX_PKT_BURST execution period will be increased. If it return more it will decrease > execution period. Stats provided for that can be used to determine if application is > behaving correctly and if there is a time for handling another port (what did for tests). > You're still re-inventing the wheel here, and I don't see any advantage to doing so. If the goal of the library is to profile the run time of a task, then you have perf and systemtap for such purposes. If the goal is to create a job scheduler that allows you to track multiple parallel tasks, and adjust their execution, there are several pre-existing libraries that any application programmer can already leverage to do just that (Berkely UPC or libtask to name just two examples). Truthfully, on a dedicated cpu, you could just as easily create multiple child processes runnnig at SCHED_RR and set their priorities accordingly. I don't see why we need another library to do what several other tools/libraries can do quite well. Neil > Pawel >