DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: "Александр Киселев" <kiselev99@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] perfomance of rte_lpm rule subsystem
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:46:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160419084640.52235b05@xeon-e3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKNYbzETqi3UJkdvMAcdoLVWx_3MQUiDxnmBrWT_49w5tXKRg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:11:11 +0300
Александр Киселев <kiselev99@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> Doing some test with rte_lpm (adding/deleting bgp full table rules) I
> noticed that
> rule subsystem is very slow even considering that probably it was never
> designed for using
> in a data forwarding plane. So I want to propose some changes to the "rule"
> subsystem.
> 
> I reimplemented rule part ot the lib using rte_hash, and perfomance of
> adding/deleted routes have increased dramatically.
> If increasing speed of adding deleting routes makes sence for anybody else
> I would like to discuss my patch.
> The patch also include changes that make next_hop 64 bit, so please just
> ignore them. The rule changes are in the following
> functions only:
> 
> rte_lpm2_create
> 
> rule_find
> rule_add
> rule_delete
> find_previous_rule
> delete_depth_small
> delete_depth_big
> 
> rte_lpm2_add
> rte_lpm2_delete
> rte_lpm2_is_rule_present
> rte_lpm2_delete_all
> 

We forked LPM back several versions ago.
I sent the patches to use BSD red-black tree for rules but the patches were
ignored. mostly because it broke ABI.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-19 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-19 11:11 Александр Киселев
2016-04-19 15:46 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2016-04-19 20:46   ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2016-04-20  5:06   ` Alexander Kiselev
2016-04-20 14:19     ` Wiles, Keith
2016-05-02 19:38   ` Александр Киселев

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=20160419084640.52235b05@xeon-e3 \
    --to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=kiselev99@gmail.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).