From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44890A0524;
Thu, 6 May 2021 10:08:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6909B410DB;
Thu, 6 May 2021 10:08:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com
[66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8885C40040
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 6 May 2021 10:08:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45])
by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4AEB5C00BA;
Thu, 6 May 2021 04:08:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163])
by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 06 May 2021 04:08:43 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h=
from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh=
mXMT44DiTXgFGPvBtq9N4CDTOOUenEDL09POqo0CWwg=; b=rZGFXSUXxPGqg7zj
SNFoKW5mc4GqnqmWiW3xiV4IEjshJveozb6aWm6PPMfiyR1PSZ5srGQCrfe8fi00
zwxJmykjQaU/SwpIKSLJrFm5srzF9b3L/Dk3F/Pd63molbbCOPVcrNXXhjsr65Am
2bgUbbfO0zKCtuvhE1WnHYoqU9qNNIZtAMS9bqzi1kiTPQIGTvprhhB2mUfMzAqu
2YAxW8Du2SRgaqouzvGsU6Cfjs9XdZxJ9REJb1WgJqNffKApeNiB42ztsIIWdUwD
Tw7qG6q3U+Uc5au17nuEI3tWLCQNu1sDvnLRtNPDbWmbV/exBnG1cHbNiidrDrN3
XbYIaw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type
:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references
:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender
:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=mXMT44DiTXgFGPvBtq9N4CDTOOUenEDL09POqo0CW
wg=; b=KDrbtz6LGX1BFPKC0tl+mN9VN7jd2uYBaf1LpHbs0xW5meXmpJ+1VaY8E
RML/Odd2EaQhNxBBVMQ3IOJYCOi0FVDYYY6v0ChVS/jPmjeZChYA6VycJoIQ82bw
+88y8c6US85EWAn63pISLYFddn6WbViWrBi1jD24HBqJwZGjBLJVbjBNfdq42zV5
CyGtas609UlyQao70zQknY9oQ1lxSskOsr7VPNZ4xhjIhD/YbnNVWYrNcarMIzwI
6d4BRIjf/IaXmaUh32GCry8MPjmVk9HpFMP3CjuG2W3YUNgIlm1lH9SAISrQ2eHo
3RndP8dkurCY6WkSDEQufOon+Mi/g==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:CqSTYA8c2aoIS5mupNffCDhR0yd1OKv2YAzzV6WjSNhf-qS2Ego9Bg>
<xme:CqSTYIuIcPWOVK3NHwqdRI6vOyZdKAVVsj5u6B6WxbesyqpnElHEN7Q3FzyHiCCMw
2deEYJxPtOLLbc6JA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdefledguddviecutefuodetggdotefrod
ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh
necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd
enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm
rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc
ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej
ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh
fuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr
lhhonhdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:CqSTYGBdG_0_5b_A353OCEt0tmYPT-XmkborlXL_QAgmim4Ae1k0uQ>
<xmx:CqSTYAdu7vNWqmTmpksNPYew9hXwiePBDqA_MYN5wCKCyGX-YS9Fmw>
<xmx:CqSTYFPnFtBNsMz1R32ORZOLxwfHOe_Eetjh0Flac76BqECqA40mPg>
<xmx:C6STYGqeR6aNVuc_2wps_Bl3Q3CR4NYylD7kO8WO5Vo8p74oQCnu8Q>
Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184])
by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA;
Thu, 6 May 2021 04:08:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>,
Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, rsanford@akamai.com,
erik.g.carrillo@intel.com
Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 10:08:39 +0200
Message-ID: <2452528.adedXRvZAq@thomas>
In-Reply-To: <b42c57f7-8260-65d1-e3ff-5e86d09d1503@huawei.com>
References: <1618470748-12369-1-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com>
<1986861.sBpPVbSSCl@thomas> <b42c57f7-8260-65d1-e3ff-5e86d09d1503@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/timer: fix incorrect time interval
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
06/05/2021 04:06, Chengchang Tang:
>
> On 2021/5/6 5:37, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 15/04/2021 09:12, Min Hu (Connor):
> >> From: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
> >>
> >> Timer sample example assumes that the frequency of the timer is about
> >> 2Ghz to control the period of calling rte_timer_manage(). But this
> >> assumption is easy to fail. For example. the frequency of tsc on ARM64
> >> is much less than 2Ghz.
> >>
> >> This patch uses the frequency of the current timer to calculate the
> >> correct time interval to ensure consistent result on all platforms.
> >>
> >> In addition, the rte_rdtsc() is replaced with the more recommended
> >> rte_get_timer_cycles function in this patch.
> >>
> >> Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> > [...]
> >> /*
> >> - * Call the timer handler on each core: as we don't
> >> - * need a very precise timer, so only call
> >> - * rte_timer_manage() every ~10ms (at 2Ghz). In a real
> >> - * application, this will enhance performances as
> >> - * reading the HPET timer is not efficient.
> >> + * Call the timer handler on each core: as we don't need a
> >> + * very precise timer, so only call rte_timer_manage()
> >> + * every ~10ms. since rte_eal_hpet_init() has not been
> >> + * called, the rte_rdtsc() will be used at runtime.
> >
> > I don't understand this last sentence.
> >
>
> This is explaining why we can use rte_get_timer_cycles() instead of rte_rdtsc().
> In this example, we call tsc to improve its performance. So, we invoked rte_rdtsc()
> here. Now the function rte_get_timer_cycles() encapsulates these counters. It will
> invoke the corresponding counter according to the user's initialization of the counter.
That's very confusing. Better to drop.
>
> >> + * In a real application, this will enhance performances
> >> + * as reading the HPET timer is not efficient.
> >> */
> >> - cur_tsc = rte_rdtsc();
> >> + cur_tsc = rte_get_timer_cycles();