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 E51EB432F0; Fri, 10 Nov 2023 08:42:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E41402E7; Fri, 10 Nov 2023 08:42:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCFE4026D for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2023 08:42:20 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1699602139; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SCkd06G/tlCeZdExFXYSzKiMGI6fAEzMnawmnamWQSM=; b=R5/kKNPuF2vVEfZTIj1zPo9eudyMH4mJvLePAl6qRFJ/6PP9WgFG7zlZbMnvd73zrc0Eho 3zhVTkVNH9ar1+plOHIcLP34hoqzwEDKA2fAOVfO6OBa+F+SBXx8va8Cn5wVX+nuznqLdx tFKEhxxFsDCOd2X4CszoQZISa8ExyNE= Received: from mail-lf1-f70.google.com (mail-lf1-f70.google.com [209.85.167.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-435-so54RrIyMGCoyJi8E5jiFA-1; Fri, 10 Nov 2023 02:42:16 -0500 X-MC-Unique: so54RrIyMGCoyJi8E5jiFA-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-50948f24d14so1694487e87.1 for ; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 23:42:16 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699602135; x=1700206935; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=SCkd06G/tlCeZdExFXYSzKiMGI6fAEzMnawmnamWQSM=; b=WU1W12SthTJLjyDoSgEs6Lhrvv6X3T/gY3yZZ1EbFhHxWFLLISZOd1aE/mU1RTHZuW ITaN+xX+c67eScmZ6j5hPMl2VN1vDrdlS+Y7F36FPxYwV9hTEM/0ux9l32cc1mwM9s2W BShnSL7ELcdzdDioXLYHDTWbUBORq/wxt/PJ9YKOpZyXDREQwiWHfxQr4iAEqVaDx51o PCt/Vbx74PU2MrH+mvJnJ0cywnGmlOYVOG0YLLU2JIBP3gQyIxoZPOu+zs59IaAYmgMu s+iRx/OzygyoZB4ub47gvN3dmCAqUSw+sc2/uEtQEJd7UGBidJ7nxexxnRCH9TLpGj3M RODw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzPSh1GpDsEyZTgEkYo3VR1aTt1FBJz8Xxsxwgj9wUMcAA42QrC BSd5+zpADAixM7Zx78gTiqyt7zoK8NIg4zb6OB9ByxH9sQ1veuleyhP01QjZwbm9e56cnfp68f+ 0T9Xdemw2Lkwn+HbgKK8= X-Received: by 2002:a19:e04b:0:b0:507:a671:3231 with SMTP id g11-20020a19e04b000000b00507a6713231mr2755868lfj.52.1699602135185; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 23:42:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEz6Laf/QQ+th1HUymyovStKzwHFVACtyT6LT4RZAhEUxgkuep6bjlaGNQCjIJilWhNJZmKJUdN/Z3yRsWTQZY= X-Received: by 2002:a19:e04b:0:b0:507:a671:3231 with SMTP id g11-20020a19e04b000000b00507a6713231mr2755858lfj.52.1699602134890; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 23:42:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0d975b44d6d443abaa00c02a1967c6b7@verisign.com> In-Reply-To: <0d975b44d6d443abaa00c02a1967c6b7@verisign.com> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 08:42:03 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lpm: improve performance with copious IPv4 peering routes To: "Warrington, Jeffrey" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Julien Charbon , Bruce Richardson , Vladimir Medvedkin X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Hello Jeffrey, On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 12:11=E2=80=AFAM Warrington, Jeffrey wrote: > > Minimize the performance impact of large numbers of BGP peering > routes by updating LPM's IPv4 code to use a hash like the IPv6 code. > > Co-authored-by: Julien Charbon > Signed-off-by: Julien Charbon > Signed-off-by: Jeff Warrington > Co-authored-by: Nicolas Witkowski > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Witkowski > Co-authored-by: Rohit Gupta > Signed-off-by: Rohit Gupta Thanks for the patch. Cc: lpm maintainers. Don't forget to Cc: maintainers when sending patches. You can simply pass --cc-cmd devtools/get-maintainer.sh to git send-email. Can you provide performance numbers? After this patch, LPM and LPM6 implementations become close. Did you consider refactoring so that LPM and LPM6 can share more code? > --- > lib/lpm/rte_lpm.c | 306 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ > lib/lpm/rte_lpm.h | 6 + Seeing how no other .c is touched and no exposed symbol use it, exposing the rte_lpm_rule_key structure in the public API is unneeded. > 2 files changed, 149 insertions(+), 163 deletions(-) --=20 David Marchand