From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0C6046A19; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:01:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC924021F; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:01:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f176.google.com (mail-qk1-f176.google.com [209.85.222.176]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872F040156 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:01:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f176.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7d3cc0017fdso118284285a.3 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:01:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1750950082; x=1751554882; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=19HjYfJBaOhNAMDTceJ8g1sfUfTf3LrXkS0xyc9O2Bs=; b=W8ZO6wCEyg3scVkgPgEfPu4zOBqRGUUpC53nNu0l8EYPb4up8ufqVY1CRGNn1GMEbA q3il01Q5iPEJI9nmKbegL0Ug614DtGElRjlYXStgVqbbb2XNIO47YVbGNOxwRypd6NiB 00wtC0sYHxyW/+V+3iLTbJQCTHOwwLv4wz9NpgXYmG6F2HW2gk/6iRkO8tCgLFMJpKMi OprAIgsq4Ory4mfPUwi7w32Em1j6E2sy4T5DEuQGjzM4/VrMMt19ztcmv8dcq0ZJv0U2 KT9UuOOvmE+kirYYThjnpckP417qW4wWxWgrnF5fxWt3Qi4/Zh5DI3J5g+IhXNtF3ylo cryA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1750950082; x=1751554882; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=19HjYfJBaOhNAMDTceJ8g1sfUfTf3LrXkS0xyc9O2Bs=; b=qxd0UfpE8jC4Dj4h4exel+KT3UQY4tiMa9pOn7cMTS5L/8m0W0D8iIzshJctFrQrPu Ht++9R36eHljHi6aHgEhAHttn0h8RwKer31GpuHGj/vY4utmigluZqWjvNyCQJsUFwMY EgDZXGeARkeVrRMcawZrEVhTOysfigVasfaFc2rXmDV/nUE+Bdz77wbIZ2lu6XhgBnj9 GDCZI81cJR6KIYhFQDXXmBC2rVAe/DbBS4hfsQusE9vdxZu+YHyktqgIhTPeo3nm1+Z1 bxoY7NOfd/UkuZu1Z02+oMDxmw/fphkTrYRxzYFy2HeVU2NyMvjIQl7ieLBw4KeEjGG0 iKUQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwOSdiCXA/G9SAF5uUB0TN7p+0dNeq02jtdj1Ek51FgrLzYb58O qfrVPzAb54kHPJRxKFLZvu9331Kkqvbd6fu+Df7wDlihP1eErc9IVcirIO6ZSnOlEj8= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsqmiAgoQ6bmbsLR1NuopyKCB388/ij1bfx60p7nOxRW1cJprsl7AD0nQ4zIZB RNdxSjTY3jNLZGjg8ZsObaOU4uVjRh4j1rfsYeR5UL1mPtvEkwcpsAoE9w7e09MYWR0AnZmZB9r twbePGqcscRI/w5tpj/7Eg03UFwEIjrEMqrT/qPUnffds+TvljyQvMJMBeMFAVcSu99YswzHiUc Q78uQah/Efts8/JvkVQG2vlrzBlm43ZSOmTdtJYOkXvD1gAwq53EBuiKgutNXUvb+7kb5u+RQV3 zipkLE08Fm1u/N6tJtBkD8wBONK3lpm1/WG86vHS5q/ZvEx7k0IKjEk8BeZf82z2kSrbHRo9FgA pbG0JjsN6Hqt1bFli6wiJMlxV8PgZOuQ95gjWFrwPNprkDXGPPQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEiADTs3xQW9urREUByLeyrcmdV8ZL7UADjYFXPB2PRNJABbzvpNqp5KcsNTlLqxNGLBbwuVw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2a15:b0:7d0:96e8:478d with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7d42977c947mr878194085a.39.1750950080827; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7d44317c843sm11003685a.42.2025.06.26.08.01.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:01:17 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: "Varghese, Vipin" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , David Marchand , "stable@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] latencystats: fix receive sample MP issues Message-ID: <20250626080117.24bb3cc7@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20250613003547.39239-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20250617150252.814215-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20250617150252.814215-2-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 11:31:43 +0000 "Varghese, Vipin" wrote: > Following are our understanding > > 1. increase in multi-queue latency is attributed by spinlock. > 2. the lower latency with patch for multi-queue is because the lowest of all queues are taken into account. > > Question: will there be per queue min, max, avg stats be enhanced in future? > > Tested-by: Thiyagarajan P > Reviewed-by: Vipin Varghese It would make sense for the latencystats to be per-port/per-queue and avoid the locking, but it would be a significant API change. If you actually use this then would be good to make it better.