DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Meunier, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" <julien.meunier@nokia.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>,
	"Liang, Cunming" <cunming.liang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] test/pmd_perf: change the way to drain the port
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 21:16:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <34fd3c84-ae4b-1bfb-048e-feb233eed206@nokia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a3766ff-80a5-5620-7c86-d9e48661c89b@intel.com>

Hi,

Inline reply,

On 08/01/2019 18:33, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 1/2/2019 3:55 PM, Julien Meunier wrote:
>> If the port has received less than ``pkt_per_port`` packets (for
>> example, the port has missed some packets), the test is in an infinite
>> loop.
>>
>> Instead of expecting a number of packet to receive, let the port to be
>> drained by itself. If no more packets are received, the test can
>> continue.
> 
> This looks like fixing the test_pmd_perf test case, which can stuck into endless
> loop without this patch, and since there will be already a new version for below
> comment, can you please update the patch title to describe the fix, like
> 
> test/pmd_perf: fix ....

Sure ! I will be more careful next time with the title of my patches

>>
>> Fixes: 002ade70e933 ("app/test: measure cycles per packet in Rx/Tx")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Julien Meunier <julien.meunier@nokia.com>
>> ---
>>   test/test/test_pmd_perf.c | 6 +++---
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/test/test/test_pmd_perf.c b/test/test/test_pmd_perf.c
>> index f5095c8..286e09d 100644
>> --- a/test/test/test_pmd_perf.c
>> +++ b/test/test/test_pmd_perf.c
>> @@ -493,15 +493,15 @@ main_loop(__rte_unused void *args)
>>   
>>   	for (i = 0; i < conf->nb_ports; i++) {
>>   		portid = conf->portlist[i];
>> -		int nb_free = pkt_per_port;
>> +		int nb_free = 0;
> 
> 'nb_free' is not more used or required, it can be removed completely I think.

Damn.. Missing one little correction: nb_free should be used in the printf.

- printf("free %d mbuf left in port %u\n", pkt_per_port, portid);
+ printf("free %d mbuf left in port %u\n", nb_free, portid);

> 
>>   		do { /* dry out */
>>   			nb_rx = rte_eth_rx_burst(portid, 0,
>>   						 pkts_burst, MAX_PKT_BURST);
>>   			nb_tx = 0;
>>   			while (nb_tx < nb_rx)
>>   				rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts_burst[nb_tx++]);
>> -			nb_free -= nb_rx;
>> -		} while (nb_free != 0);
>> +			nb_free += nb_rx;
>> +		} while (nb_rx != 0);
> 
> Isn't there already something wrong with this logic? It assumes after test done
> device still has 'pkt_per_port' packets in its queues, it tries to receive and
> free them, but:
> 
> nb_free = pkt_per_port = MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST = 2048
> RTE_TEST_RX_DESC_DEFAULT = RTE_TEST_TX_DESC_DEFAULT = 1024

All ports are configured with the following number of descriptors:
nb_rxd = MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST;
nb_txd = MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST;

In this case, all is OK.

But, for the test SC_CONTINUOUS (which is, by the way, the default one), 
this number is reduced
nb_rxd = RTE_TEST_RX_DESC_DEFAULT ;
nb_txd = RTE_TEST_TX_DESC_DEFAULT ;

> When device queue length is 1024, how it can be holding 2048 packets? So it
> can't exit from this loop. Since this should be working, what am I missing?

In the main_loop, the test xmits 2048 pkts per port. Then, do_measure 
-measure_rxtx for example- receives all incoming packets and resends to 
the port.

However... Without my patch, on a previous DPDK version (17.08), which 
configures less RX and TX descriptors (RXD=128 TXD=512), I didn't notice 
this issue on ixgbe PMD (but not on fm10k).

So... You're right, how it can be holding 2048 packets with this 
configuration... I will check on my side.

> But overall, this stage is after the test done and for cleanup, I think your
> suggestion is reasonable, only please check above 'nb_free' comment.

I will submit a new patch.

Thanks for your comments !

> Thanks,
> ferruh
> 

Best regards,
Julien Meunier

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-08 21:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-02 15:55 [dpdk-dev] " Julien Meunier
2019-01-08 17:33 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-08 21:16   ` Meunier, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) [this message]
2019-02-03 19:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] test/pmd_perf: fix " Julien Meunier
2019-02-07 12:28   ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-02-18 11:25     ` Meunier, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)
2019-02-18 12:28       ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-02-20 21:06   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Julien Meunier
2019-02-21 16:46     ` Ferruh Yigit

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=34fd3c84-ae4b-1bfb-048e-feb233eed206@nokia.com \
    --to=julien.meunier@nokia.com \
    --cc=cunming.liang@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    /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).