From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC25AA046B
for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:45:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6576237B4;
Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:45:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87882AB
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:45:17 +0200 (CEST)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58])
by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
28 Jun 2019 06:45:16 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,427,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="153374375"
Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155])
by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jun 2019 06:45:15 -0700
Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.46]) by
IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.159]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000;
Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:45:14 +0100
From: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>, "Richardson, Bruce"
<bruce.richardson@intel.com>
CC: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: add profiling for Rx/Tx burst
routines
Thread-Index: AQHVLB2LiFqA9Tcldkqe9G7CazCHrqat1HAAgAAGHACAAACPAIABAwoAgAI3xvA=
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:45:13 +0000
Message-ID: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C260DBE4EB@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1561553317-16777-1-git-send-email-viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
<20190626125732.GC862@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
<AM4PR05MB326560C9B6AD274C82090E39D2E20@AM4PR05MB3265.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
<20190626132124.GD862@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
<AM4PR05MB3265D1F334F4FE9D8646FC57D2FD0@AM4PR05MB3265.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR05MB3265D1F334F4FE9D8646FC57D2FD0@AM4PR05MB3265.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZDhjNjZiZjctN2YyZC00NmI4LWI1YmYtNmZlYzlkNWQ3ZWQ4IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiRHdIdG1qSTU5d1hjU0dnOWhKTzdZRjhiNTFJK2krTFNIdjZubURzcjc4eEpyQTNjTU9pa0ZOMUJOd2J1WXFPQSJ9
x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.2.0.6
dlp-reaction: no-action
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: add profiling for Rx/Tx burst
routines
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Hi Bruce, Slava,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Slava Ovsiienko [mailto:viacheslavo@mellanox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 5:49 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>;
> Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: add profiling for Rx/Tx burs=
t
> routines
>=20
> OK, what do you think about this:
>=20
> #ifdef RTE_TEST_PMD_RECORD_CORE_CYCLES
> if (record_cycle & RECORD_TX_CORE_CYCLES) {
> .. do measurement stuff ..
> }
> #endif
>=20
> + add some new command to config in runtime: "set record_cycle 3"
>=20
> We keep existing RTE_TEST_PMD_RECORD_CORE_CYCLES, do not introduce
> new build-time configs and get some new runtime configuring.
>=20
> WBR,
> Slava
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 16:21
> > To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; bernard.iremonger@intel.com; ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: add profiling for Rx/Tx
> > burst routines
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 01:19:24PM +0000, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
> > > Hi, Bruce
> > >
> > > Do you mean using "if (core_rx_cycle_enabled) {...}" instead of #ifde=
f ?
> > >
> > > No, I did not try runtime control settings.
> > > Instead I compared performance with all RECORD_CORE_XX_CYCLES
> > options
> > > enabled/disabled builds and have seen the ~1-2% performance
> > > difference
> > on my setups (mainly fwd txonly with retry).
> > > So, ticks measuring is not free.
> > >
> > > With best regards,
> > > Slava
> > >
> > Yes, I realise that measuring ticks is going to have a performance impa=
ct.
> > However, what I was referring to was exactly the former - using an "if"
> > rather than an "ifdef". I would hope with ticks disable using this
> > option shows no perf impact, and we can reduce the use of build-time
> configs.
> >
> > /Bruce
Given that RTE_TEST_PMD_RECORD_CORE_CYCLES is already in the config file.
I think it is better to be consistent and add the new RECORD macros there.
Would it be reasonable to have runtime settings available as well?
Regards,
Bernard