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 8AE95A0C58; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:14:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE144068A; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:14:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89A0840689; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:14:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892925C010F; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 04:14:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 29 Nov 2021 04:14:02 -0500 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=fm2; bh= E7yzJp3PfdA2rhkcJI91dqELTKSsnYfwgFh/05/1vYc=; b=tN431jW6ogeIrQYn o0NukOLizdgSaUY99DQfW+GTIMXTZlPnlH0B22C7PTp460g0/92H3ne/oVPdbZ22 +aYuly8QgUOHP0dUIuBFnLLMxgAjDNvg2Vkut1dwpB2j2pr2svjpCfjFmVo9kHeG NuiEo/TLhe/qIfpY9BiI6epv7dpBzgvS22hXcxs205awRqQ1JnFumJJf60e8t7fm NFQb8Q5J89l3Y1Ft86yFUBMt4aD9WxxWXGAsXsc3NMmTsHLgBniqlj0JaVILsS04 KOg9Zj9v5YIZnF6uQXB6wuAUdU07EknstEFZkHWjK1CgUdCv2m0CSnYE+pjUXz7F E/0kbQ== 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=fm1; bh=E7yzJp3PfdA2rhkcJI91dqELTKSsnYfwgFh/05/1v Yc=; b=aXYjD9H4G1GBwt8O2+4daNp3VcfNe16OjnJ7YM/gcnvg1hWdLPIyYmLFG br1xW+GyOe9NZLKwG+Mv7sqZhRZ6c0Ayz+n2FHeXopobE7NIvBhKTxDjZxRbl80z L86r+BzUmSpt9xJaooBZTIbHQddwhB5qIJRsRwNxZ4UFgr2ERqVUUwgMxvOmjMrV 5Np4DS406XhJlnxZ40Be2fBkt5CPgVy70J7fY3m0rRq2Sg1RJkGKJ79amdNU0MC8 WpUxVjsA9vMXu9ACWkIjTyUmxJpxpLCc1c2iwHUU05IvBps0FSTK0BKsDIjyJXpc c8Hi8HkRBhGWVypXTfX6OW/kIX+LQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrheelgddtudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 04:14:00 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Rakesh Kudurumalla , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran Cc: "stable@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" , "andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru" , "ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com" Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] test: avoid hang if queues are full and Tx fails Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:13:58 +0100 Message-ID: <4821372.GXAFRqVoOG@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20210720124713.603674-1-rkudurumalla@marvell.com> <2704266.42xP9hQJsM@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 29/11/2021 09:52, Rakesh Kudurumalla: > From: Thomas Monjalon > > 22/11/2021 08:59, Rakesh Kudurumalla: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > 20/07/2021 18:50, Rakesh Kudurumalla: > > > > > Current pmd_perf_autotest() in continuous mode tries to enqueue > > > > > MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST completely before starting the test. Some > > > > > drivers cannot accept complete MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST even though > > rx+tx > > > > > desc > > > > count > > > > > can fit it. > > > > > > > > Which driver is failing to do so? > > > > Why it cannot enqueue 32 packets? > > > > > > Octeontx2 driver is failing to enqueue because hardware buffers are full > > before test. Aren't you stopping the support of octeontx2? Why do you care now? > > > > Why hardware buffers are full? > Hardware buffers are full because number of number of descriptors in continuous mode > Is less than MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST, so if enque fails , there is no way hardware can drop the > Packets . pmd_per_autotest application evaluates performance after enqueueing packets > Initially. > > > > > pmd_perf_autotest() in continuous mode tries to enqueue > > > MAX_TRAFFIC_BURST (2048) before starting the test. > > > > > > > > This patch changes behaviour to stop enqueuing after few retries. > > > > > > > > If there is a real limitation, there will be issues in more places > > > > than this test program. > > > > I feel it should be addressed either in the driver or at ethdev level. > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > @@ -480,10 +483,19 @@ main_loop(__rte_unused void *args) > > > > > nb_tx = RTE_MIN(MAX_PKT_BURST, num); > > > > > nb_tx = rte_eth_tx_burst(portid, 0, > > > > > &tx_burst[idx], nb_tx); > > > > > + if (nb_tx == 0) > > > > > + retry_cnt++; > > > > > num -= nb_tx; > > > > > idx += nb_tx; > > > > > + if (retry_cnt == MAX_RETRY_COUNT) { > > > > > + retry_cnt = 0; > > > > > + break; > > > > > + }