Re: [dpdk-dev] PMD/l3fwd issue

["Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harish Patil [mailto:harish.patil@qlogic.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 2:08 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Ameen Rahman
> Subject: Re: PMD/l3fwd issue
> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> >Hi Patil,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Harish Patil
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 4:53 PM
> >> To: dev@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] PMD/l3fwd issue
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >> Have a question regarding l3fwd application. The l3fwd application
> >>expects
> >> the poll mode driver to return packets whose L2 header is 16-byte
> >>aligned.
> >
> >Yep, and as I remember, by default PMD returns ti the upper layer mbufs
> >with data offsets
> >aligned to cahce line size (64B).
> >Unless you'll change RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM config parameter.
> >
> >> Otherwise, it results in a crash. This is due to use of _mm_load_si128()
> >> and _mm_store_si128() intrinsics which expects the address to be 16-byte
> >> aligned. However, most of the real protocol stack expects packets such
> >> that its IP header be aligned on a 16-byte boundary (not L2). Its not
> >>just
> >> for IP but any L3 for that matter.  That’s way we usually see
> >> skb_reserve(skb, NET_IP_ALIGN) calls in linux drivers.
> >
> >Well, l3fwd is just an example application to demonstrate usage of DPDK
> >API
> >And max performance it could get for that type of workload.
> >No-one forces you to use aligned load/store in your own application.
> 
> Yes, I agree if its our private application. But l3fwd being widely used
> as a benchmarking/testing tool and they may ran into this issue.
> 

If someone would try to run it with RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM non-aligned on 16B, then probably yes.

> >
> >>
> >> So I’m looking for suggestions here, whether l3wd application or poll
> >>mode
> >> driver should be changed to fix that? What is the right thing to do?
> >> Can a check be added in l3fwd to use _mm_loadu_si128/_mm_storeu_si128
> >> instructions instead of mm_load_si128/_mm_store_si128 if address is
> >>found
> >> not be 16B aligned?
> >
> >I'd personally just change l3fwd to use to use
> >_mm_loadu_si128/_mm_storeu_si128 unconditionally.
> >As by default  address is 16B aligned anyway, I think that using MOVDQU
> >instead of MOVDQA here
> >shouldn't make that big difference.
> >But off course testing need to be done to make sure there is no
> >performance drop with that change.
> 
> I too would just change l3fwd application so that all poll mode drivers
> would just work. Are you proposing that we upstream l3fwd change if we
> don’t see performance drop?

Yep, I'd suggest to verify there is no performance difference and submit a patch.
From our side we can do some extra performance testing too.
Thanks
Konstantin

> 
> >Konstantin
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Harish
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> This message and any attached documents contain information from the
> >>sending company or its parent company(s), subsidiaries,
> >> divisions or branch offices that may be confidential. If you are not
> >>the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use
> >> this information. If you have received this transmission in error,
> >>please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete
> >> this message.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> This message and any attached documents contain information from the sending company or its parent company(s), subsidiaries,
> divisions or branch offices that may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use
> this information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete
> this message.