From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mempool: reduce rte_mempool structure size
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:59:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56BB6C77.8080808@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1455039006-86816-1-git-send-email-keith.wiles@intel.com>
Hi Keith,
Thank you for adding the RTE_NEXT_ABI. I think this is the way
described in the process. Your changes will be available in next
version (16.4) for people compiling with RTE_NEXT_ABI=y, and in
16.7 without option (I'm just surprised that RTE_NEXT_ABI=y in
default configs...).
I think a deprecation notice should also be added in this commit
in doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst.
Please also find comments below.
On 02/09/2016 06:30 PM, Keith Wiles wrote:
> diff --git a/config/defconfig_x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc b/config/defconfig_x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc
> index 60baf5b..02e9ace 100644
> --- a/config/defconfig_x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc
> +++ b/config/defconfig_x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc
> @@ -40,3 +40,8 @@ CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_64=y
>
> CONFIG_RTE_TOOLCHAIN="gcc"
> CONFIG_RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC=y
> +CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_SHARED_LIB=y
> +CONFIG_RTE_NEXT_ABI=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_EAL_IGB_UIO=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_KNI=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_KNI_KMOD=n
I think this should not be part of the patch.
> @@ -672,6 +704,24 @@ rte_mempool_count(const struct rte_mempool *mp)
> static unsigned
> rte_mempool_dump_cache(FILE *f, const struct rte_mempool *mp)
> {
> +#ifdef RTE_NEXT_ABI
> + unsigned lcore_id;
> + unsigned count = 0;
> + unsigned cache_count;
> +
> + fprintf(f, " cache infos:\n");
> + fprintf(f, " cache_size=%"PRIu32"\n", mp->cache_size);
> + if (mp->cache_size == 0)
> + return count;
> +
> + for (lcore_id = 0; lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE; lcore_id++) {
> + cache_count = mp->local_cache[lcore_id].len;
> + fprintf(f, " cache_count[%u]=%u\n", lcore_id, cache_count);
> + count += cache_count;
> + }
> + fprintf(f, " total_cache_count=%u\n", count);
> + return count;
> +#else
> #if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0
> unsigned lcore_id;
> unsigned count = 0;
I think in this case we could avoid to duplicate the code without
beeing unclear by using the proper #ifdefs:
#if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 || defined(RTE_NEXT_ABI)
/* common code */
#ifdef RTE_NEXT_ABI
if (mp->cache_size == 0)
return count;
#endif
/* common code */
#else
...
#endif
> @@ -755,6 +806,26 @@ mempool_audit_cookies(const struct rte_mempool *mp)
> #define mempool_audit_cookies(mp) do {} while(0)
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef RTE_NEXT_ABI
> +/* check cookies before and after objects */
> +static void
> +mempool_audit_cache(const struct rte_mempool *mp)
> +{
> + /* check cache size consistency */
> + unsigned lcore_id;
> +
> + if (mp->cache_size == 0)
> + return;
> +
> + for (lcore_id = 0; lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE; lcore_id++) {
> + if (mp->local_cache[lcore_id].len > mp->cache_flushthresh) {
> + RTE_LOG(CRIT, MEMPOOL, "badness on cache[%u]\n",
> + lcore_id);
> + rte_panic("MEMPOOL: invalid cache len\n");
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +#else
same here
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> index 6e2390a..fc9b595 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> @@ -95,6 +95,19 @@ struct rte_mempool_debug_stats {
> } __rte_cache_aligned;
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef RTE_NEXT_ABI
> +/**
> + * A structure that stores a per-core object cache.
> + */
> +struct rte_mempool_cache {
> + unsigned len; /**< Cache len */
> + /*
> + * Cache is allocated to this size to allow it to overflow in certain
> + * cases to avoid needless emptying of cache.
> + */
> + void *objs[RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE * 3]; /**< Cache objects */
> +} __rte_cache_aligned;
> +#else
same here
> @@ -755,19 +793,25 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
> __mempool_put_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, void * const *obj_table,
> unsigned n, int is_mp)
> {
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
> struct rte_mempool_cache *cache;
> uint32_t index;
> void **cache_objs;
> unsigned lcore_id = rte_lcore_id();
> uint32_t cache_size = mp->cache_size;
> uint32_t flushthresh = mp->cache_flushthresh;
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #endif /* RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 */
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
this looks strange... I think it does not work properly.
Why not
#if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 || defined(RTE_NEXT_ABI)
> /* increment stat now, adding in mempool always success */
> __MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, put, n);
>
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
> /* cache is not enabled or single producer or non-EAL thread */
> if (unlikely(cache_size == 0 || is_mp == 0 ||
> lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE))
> @@ -802,7 +846,9 @@ __mempool_put_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, void * const *obj_table,
> return;
>
> ring_enqueue:
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #endif /* RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 */
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
>
> /* push remaining objects in ring */
> #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_DEBUG
> @@ -946,7 +992,9 @@ __mempool_get_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table,
> unsigned n, int is_mc)
> {
> int ret;
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #if RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
> struct rte_mempool_cache *cache;
> uint32_t index, len;
> void **cache_objs;
> @@ -992,7 +1040,9 @@ __mempool_get_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table,
> return 0;
>
> ring_dequeue:
> +#ifndef RTE_NEXT_ABI /* Note: ifndef */
> #endif /* RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE > 0 */
> +#endif /* RTE_NEXT_ABI */
>
> /* get remaining objects from ring */
> if (is_mc)
Same in those cases.
Regards,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-10 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 23:02 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mempool: Reduce " Keith Wiles
2016-02-03 17:11 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-02-08 11:02 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-02-08 15:57 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-09 17:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mempool: reduce " Keith Wiles
2016-02-10 16:59 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2016-02-10 17:22 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-10 18:35 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-10 20:06 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-02-10 21:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Keith Wiles
2016-02-12 11:23 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-02-12 13:57 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-12 14:19 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-02-12 15:07 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-12 15:38 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-12 15:50 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-02-12 15:58 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-15 9:58 ` Hunt, David
2016-02-15 10:15 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-02-15 10:21 ` Hunt, David
2016-02-15 12:31 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-02-12 15:54 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-02-12 18:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Keith Wiles
2016-02-15 9:20 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-04-14 9:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] " Olivier Matz
2016-04-14 13:28 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-04-14 13:43 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-04-14 13:53 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-05-17 5:31 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-10 18:01 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Wiles, Keith
2016-02-10 18:02 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-12 11:52 ` Panu Matilainen
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=56BB6C77.8080808@6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
/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).