DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: "Loftus, Ciara" <ciara.loftus@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] net/af_xdp: Increase max batch size to 512
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 15:38:13 +0000
Message-ID: <7acd6f03-4522-a79e-5899-240953d64aec@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a0f4b3cde6348cfaf343b2457462403@intel.com>

On 3/3/2021 3:07 PM, Loftus, Ciara wrote:
>>
>> On 2/24/2021 11:18 AM, Ciara Loftus wrote:
>>> Prior to this the max size was 32 which was unnecessarily
>>> small.
>>
>> Can you please describe the impact? Why changed from 32 to 512?
>> I assume this is to improve the performance but can you please explicitly
>> document it in the commit log?
> 
> Indeed - improved performance due to bulk operations and fewer ring accesses and syscalls.
> The value 512 was arbitrary. I will change this to the default ring size as defined by libbpf (2048) in v2.
> Will update the commit log with this info.
> 
>>
>>> Also enforce the max batch size for TX for both
>>> copy and zero copy modes. Prior to this only copy mode
>>> enforced the max size.
>>>
>>
>> By enforcing, the PMD ignores the user provided burst value if it is more than
>> PMS supported MAX, and this ignoring is done in silent. Also there is no way
>> to
>> discover this MAX value without checking the code.
>>
>> Overall, why this max values are required at all? After quick check I can see
>> they are used for some bulk operations, which I assume can be eliminated,
>> what
>> do you think?
> 
> We need to size some arrays at compile time with this max value.
> 
> Instead of removing the bulk operations which may impact performance, how about taking an approach where we split batches that are > 2048 into smaller batches and still handle all the packets instead of discarding those > 2048. Something like what's done in ixgbe for example:
> http://code.dpdk.org/dpdk/v21.02/source/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c#L318
>` 

If there is no reasonable way to eliminate the fix sized arrays, above 
suggestion looks good.

Thanks,
ferruh

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-03 15:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-18  9:23 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 0/3] AF_XDP Preferred Busy Polling Ciara Loftus
2021-02-18  9:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 1/3] net/af_xdp: Increase max batch size to 512 Ciara Loftus
2021-02-18  9:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 2/3] net/af_xdp: Use recvfrom() instead of poll() Ciara Loftus
2021-02-18  9:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 3/3] net/af_xdp: preferred busy polling Ciara Loftus
2021-02-24 11:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] AF_XDP Preferred Busy Polling Ciara Loftus
2021-02-24 11:18   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] net/af_xdp: Increase max batch size to 512 Ciara Loftus
2021-03-01 16:31     ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-03 15:07       ` Loftus, Ciara
2021-03-03 15:38         ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2021-02-24 11:18   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/af_xdp: Use recvfrom() instead of poll() Ciara Loftus
2021-02-24 11:18   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] net/af_xdp: preferred busy polling Ciara Loftus
2021-03-01 16:32     ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-04 12:26       ` Loftus, Ciara
2021-03-08 15:54         ` Loftus, Ciara
2021-03-09 10:19   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/3] AF_XDP Preferred Busy Polling Ciara Loftus
2021-03-09 10:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] net/af_xdp: allow bigger batch sizes Ciara Loftus
2021-03-09 16:33       ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-10  7:21         ` Loftus, Ciara
2021-03-09 10:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] net/af_xdp: Use recvfrom() instead of poll() Ciara Loftus
2021-03-09 10:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] net/af_xdp: preferred busy polling Ciara Loftus
2021-03-09 16:33       ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-10  7:55         ` Loftus, Ciara
2021-03-10  7:48     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] AF_XDP Preferred Busy Polling Ciara Loftus
2021-03-10  7:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] net/af_xdp: allow bigger batch sizes Ciara Loftus
2021-03-10  7:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/af_xdp: Use recvfrom() instead of poll() Ciara Loftus
2021-03-10  7:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] net/af_xdp: preferred busy polling Ciara Loftus
2021-03-10 17:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] AF_XDP Preferred Busy Polling 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=7acd6f03-4522-a79e-5899-240953d64aec@intel.com \
    --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=ciara.loftus@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git