DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rao, Nikhil" <nikhil.rao@intel.com>
To: "Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)" <matias.elo@nokia.com>,
	"Mattias Rönnblom" <hofors@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] eventdev: sw rx adapter enqueue caching
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 11:24:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1F668163772FA946975B9466A9DFF729EDE05DEA@ORSMSX122.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190509112417.-yIcjPSZFDXz26bqpu943Byy_siVcGjLPVzB-k0upgM@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5C45143B-6A87-4837-A095-4FFE5A9EAE87@nokia.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Elo, Matias (Nokia -
> FI/Espoo)
> Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2019 5:33 PM
> To: Mattias Rönnblom <hofors@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>;
> dev@dpdk.org; nd <nd@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] eventdev: sw rx adapter enqueue caching
> 
> 
> 
> On 7 May 2019, at 15:01, Mattias Rönnblom
> <hofors@lysator.liu.se<mailto:hofors@lysator.liu.se>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 2019-05-07 13:12, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The SW eventdev rx adapter has an internal enqueue buffer 'rx_adapter-
> event_enqueue_buffer', which stores packets received from the NIC until at
> least BATCH_SIZE (=32) packets have been received before enqueueing them
> to eventdev. For example in case of validation testing, where often a small
> number of specific test packets is sent to the NIC, this causes a lot of
> problems. One would always have to transmit at least BATCH_SIZE test
> packets before anything can be received from eventdev. Additionally, if the
> rx
> packet rate is slow this also adds a considerable amount of additional delay.
> 
> Looking at the rx adapter API and sw implementation code there doesn’t
> seem to be a way to disable this internal caching. In my opinion this
> “functionality" makes testing sw rx adapter so cumbersome that either the
> implementation should be modified to enqueue the cached packets after a
> while (some performance penalty) or there should be some method to
> disable caching. Any opinions how this issue could be fixed?
> At the minimum, I would think there should be a compile time option.
> From a use case perspective, I think it falls under latency vs throughput
> considerations. If there is a latency sensitive application, it might not want
> to wait till 32 packets are received.
> 
> From what I understood from Matias Elo and also after a quick glance in the
> code, the unlucky packets will be buffered indefinitely, in case the system
> goes idle. This is totally unacceptable (both in production and validation), in
> my opinion, and should be filed as a bug.
> 
> 
> Indeed, this is what happens. I’ll create a bug report to track this issue.
> 
I have posted a patch for this issue
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/53350/

Please let me know your comments.

Thanks,
Nikhil


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-05-09 11:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-07  9:52 Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-07  9:52 ` Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-07 11:12 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-05-07 11:12   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-05-07 12:01   ` Mattias Rönnblom
2019-05-07 12:01     ` Mattias Rönnblom
2019-05-07 12:03     ` Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-07 12:03       ` Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-07 12:13       ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-05-07 12:13         ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-05-09 11:24       ` Rao, Nikhil [this message]
2019-05-09 11:24         ` Rao, Nikhil
2019-05-09 15:02         ` Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-09 15:02           ` Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
2019-05-07 11:56 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2019-05-07 11:56   ` Mattias Rönnblom

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=1F668163772FA946975B9466A9DFF729EDE05DEA@ORSMSX122.amr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=nikhil.rao@intel.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hofors@lysator.liu.se \
    --cc=matias.elo@nokia.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.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).