DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>
Cc: Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>, Gavin Hu <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>,
	dev <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>,
	dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:33:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102173359.GE1454@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6F792248-5555-4831-AFA3-9D839770B37D@arm.com>

On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 04:58:43PM +0000, Dharmik Thakkar wrote:
> 
> > On Nov 2, 2020, at 9:11 AM, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:36:31AM -0500, Dharmik Thakkar wrote:
> >> Fix incorrect calculations for LPM adds, LPM deletes,
> >> and average cycles in RCU QSBR perf tests
> >> 
> > 
> > To help review this patch, could you provide some more details in the
> > commit log as to what exactly was wrong with the calculation and how this
> > patch fixes things?
> > 
> 
> I will update the commit message in the next version. Adding it here as well:
> 
> Since, rcu qsbr tests run for ‘RCU_ITERATIONS’ and not ‘ITERATIONS’,
> replace ‘ITERATIONS’ with ‘RCU_ITERATIONS’ for calculating adds, deletes, and cycles.
> 
> Also, for multi-writer perf test, each writer only writes half of NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES.
> For 2 writers, total adds (or deletes) should be (RCU_ITERATIONS * NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES) instead of
> (2 * RCU_ITERATIONS * NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES).
> 
> Since, for both the single and multi writer tests, total adds/deletes is equal to (RCU_ITERATIONS * NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES),
> this has been replaced with a macro ’TOTAL_WRITES’ and furthermore, ‘g_writes’ has been removed since it is always a fixed value 
> equal to TOTAL_WRITES.
> 
Thanks for the clear explanation.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-02 17:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-29 15:36 Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 17:17   ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-02 22:11     ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 10:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation " David Marchand
2020-11-02 15:11 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-02 16:58   ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 17:21     ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-02 17:33     ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2020-11-02 23:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:30     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:28     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:42       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:21     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:56       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  4:21     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:33       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:32         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03 14:03           ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 14:51             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03 18:01             ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-03  5:12   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:21       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:22       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:35         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-04 15:46         ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 16:49           ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 18:58       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:34           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-05 15:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test David Marchand

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=20201102173359.GE1454@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com \
    --cc=Gavin.Hu@arm.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    --cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.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).