DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: Yipeng Wang <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>,
	"stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"sameh.gobriel@intel.com" <sameh.gobriel@intel.com>,
	nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/3] test/hash: add readwrite test for ext table
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 05:54:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM6PR08MB3672D67BFC08D504214BA28198F30@AM6PR08MB3672.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181026101216.GA14620@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

> > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:48:05PM -0700, Yipeng Wang wrote:
> > > > This commit improves the readwrite test to consider extendable
> > > > table feature and add more functional tests to cover more corner cases.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yipeng Wang <yipeng1.wang@intel.com> ---
> > > > test/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 70
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 58
> > > > insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > With the extension of this test case, and the addition of other test
> > > cases by Honnappa in the other patch sets in this release, we are
> > > building up quite a large set of hash table autotests, some of whose
> > > meaning and use is a bit obscure. Are there any hash tests that you
> > > feel could be removed at this point, to simplify things?
> > >
> > (this comment does not apply to this patch) Looks like your concern is
> > about maintenance of the test code.
> > IMO, we need to reduce the number of configuration flags in this library
> which should reduce the number of test cases.
> > The flags I think that are not necessary are:
> > RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT - The tests prove that
> this gives significant performance boost. IMO, if the platform supports it, it
> should be enabled without user consent (I am not an expert on TSX).
> > RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY - Most use cases require this
> support. Only use case where this is not required is a single thread doing both
> inserts and lookups. Even if such a use case is valid, the lock over head should
> be small.
> >
> I agree with the idea. What I suggest is that only a single flag should be
> needed, and that only for the uncommon case, i.e. where we do not need any
> locking of the hash-table. Otherwise the hash should be thread safe by default
> and using the most effective locking mechanism for the platform.
> 
RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF - should take care of this.

> Unfortunately, doing this requires an ABI change, but since it only should
> affect the create function, it should be doable with function versioning to
> keep backward compatibility.
> 
Looks simple enough. Version the rte_hash_create function and map the existing function to 18.08. The new version of the function will always enable hw_trans_mem_support and rw_concurrency. Should we check to see if these flags are set by the user and print a warning message about deprecation of these flags in the newer version of the function?

> /Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-29  5:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-10 21:48 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/3] Improvements over rte hash and tests Yipeng Wang
2018-10-10 21:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] hash: fix unnecessary pause Yipeng Wang
2018-10-10 21:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/3] test/hash: change multiwriter test to use jhash Yipeng Wang
2018-10-11 11:27   ` Bruce Richardson
2018-10-10 21:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/3] test/hash: add readwrite test for ext table Yipeng Wang
2018-10-24 20:36   ` Bruce Richardson
2018-10-25  1:06     ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-26  0:23     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-26 10:12       ` Bruce Richardson
2018-10-29  5:54         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli [this message]
2018-10-31  4:21         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01  4:54   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] hash: deprecate lock ellision and read/write concurreny flags Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01  4:54     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01  9:45       ` Bruce Richardson
2018-11-01  9:48         ` Bruce Richardson
2018-11-01 19:43         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-02 11:11           ` Bruce Richardson
2018-11-01 23:25       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01 23:25         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] hash: prepare for deprecation of flags Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-02 11:14           ` Bruce Richardson
2018-11-01 23:25         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] hash: deprecate lock ellision and read/write concurreny flags Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01 23:25         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] test/hash: stop using " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01 23:25         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] doc/hash: deprecate " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-02 11:21           ` Bruce Richardson
2018-11-02 11:25         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] hash: " Bruce Richardson
2018-11-02 17:38           ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-12-20 20:10             ` Yigit, Ferruh
2018-11-01  4:54     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] test/hash: stop using " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-11-01  4:54     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] doc/hash: deprecate " Honnappa Nagarahalli

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=AM6PR08MB3672D67BFC08D504214BA28198F30@AM6PR08MB3672.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=sameh.gobriel@intel.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=yipeng1.wang@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).