From: "Eelco Chaudron" <echaudro@redhat.com>
To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] lib/librte_meter: add RFC4115 trTCM meter support
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 15:03:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <EDDB3D8F-CDD5-4E71-A5B3-08D51F571A35@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891268E81857C@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 21 Dec 2018, at 17:15, Dumitrescu, Cristian wrote:
> Hi Eelco,
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> +/** trTCM parameters per metered traffic flow. The CIR, EIT, CBS and
>> EBS
>
> Small typo here: EIT to be replaced by EIR.
>
>> +parameters only count bytes of IP packets and do not include link
>> specific
>> +headers. The CBS and EBS need to be greater than zero if CIR and EIR
>> are
>> +none-zero respectively.*/
>> +struct rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_params {
>> + uint64_t cir; /**< Committed Information Rate (CIR). Measured in
>> bytes per second. */
>> + uint64_t eir; /**< Excess Information Rate (EIR). Measured in bytes
>> per second. */
>> + uint64_t cbs; /**< Committed Burst Size (CBS). Measured in bytes.
>> */
>> + uint64_t ebs; /**< Excess Burst Size (EBS). Measured in bytes. */
>> +};
>> +
>
> <snip>
>
>> +static inline enum rte_meter_color __rte_experimental
>> +rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_color_blind_check(
>> + struct rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115 *m,
>> + struct rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_profile *p,
>> + uint64_t time,
>> + uint32_t pkt_len)
>> +{
>> + uint64_t time_diff_tc, time_diff_te, n_periods_tc, n_periods_te,
>> tc,
>> te;
>> +
>> + /* Bucket update */
>> + time_diff_tc = time - m->time_tc;
>> + time_diff_te = time - m->time_te;
>> + n_periods_tc = time_diff_tc / p->cir_period;
>> + n_periods_te = time_diff_te / p->eir_period;
>> + m->time_tc += n_periods_tc * p->cir_period;
>> + m->time_te += n_periods_te * p->eir_period;
>> +
>> + tc = m->tc + n_periods_tc * p->cir_bytes_per_period;
>> + if (tc > p->cbs)
>> + tc = p->cbs;
>> +
>> + te = m->te + n_periods_te * p->eir_bytes_per_period;
>> + if (te > p->ebs)
>> + te = p->ebs;
>> +
>> + /* Color logic */
>> + if (tc >= pkt_len) {
>> + m->tc = tc - pkt_len;
>> + m->te = te;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_GREEN;
>> + } else if (te >= pkt_len) {
>> + m->tc = tc;
>> + m->te = te - pkt_len;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_YELLOW;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* If we end up here the color is RED */
>> + m->tc = tc;
>> + m->te = te;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_RED;
>> +}
>> +
>
> Since the branch (tc >= pkt_len) == TRUE always returns, I suggest we
> remove the following "else", as it is redundant:
>
> /* Color logic */
> if (tc >= pkt_len) {
> m->tc = tc - pkt_len;
> m->te = te;
> return e_RTE_METER_GREEN;
> }
>
> if (te >= pkt_len) {
> m->tc = tc;
> m->te = te - pkt_len;
> return e_RTE_METER_YELLOW;
> }
>
> /* If we end up here the color is RED */
> m->tc = tc;
> m->te = te;
> return e_RTE_METER_RED;
>
>
>> +static inline enum rte_meter_color __rte_experimental
>> +rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_color_aware_check(
>> + struct rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115 *m,
>> + struct rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_profile *p,
>> + uint64_t time,
>> + uint32_t pkt_len,
>> + enum rte_meter_color pkt_color)
>> +{
>> + uint64_t time_diff_tc, time_diff_te, n_periods_tc, n_periods_te,
>> tc,
>> te;
>> +
>> + /* Bucket update */
>> + time_diff_tc = time - m->time_tc;
>> + time_diff_te = time - m->time_te;
>> + n_periods_tc = time_diff_tc / p->cir_period;
>> + n_periods_te = time_diff_te / p->eir_period;
>> + m->time_tc += n_periods_tc * p->cir_period;
>> + m->time_te += n_periods_te * p->eir_period;
>> +
>> + tc = m->tc + n_periods_tc * p->cir_bytes_per_period;
>> + if (tc > p->cbs)
>> + tc = p->cbs;
>> +
>> + te = m->te + n_periods_te * p->eir_bytes_per_period;
>> + if (te > p->ebs)
>> + te = p->ebs;
>> +
>> + /* Color logic */
>> + if (pkt_color == e_RTE_METER_GREEN) {
>> + if (tc >= pkt_len) {
>> + m->tc = tc - pkt_len;
>> + m->te = te;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_GREEN;
>> + } else if (te >= pkt_len) {
>> + m->tc = tc;
>> + m->te = te - pkt_len;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_YELLOW;
>> + }
>> + } else if (pkt_color == e_RTE_METER_YELLOW && te >= pkt_len) {
>> + m->tc = tc;
>> + m->te = te - pkt_len;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_YELLOW;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* If we end up here the color is RED */
>> + m->tc = tc;
>> + m->te = te;
>> + return e_RTE_METER_RED;
>> +}
>> +
>> +
>
> I suggest we follow the logic from the diagram in the RFC rather than
> the logic in the text preceding the diagram. Although the two
> descriptions are equivalent (after a bit of thinking), the diagram
> seems more optimal to me:
>
> /* Color logic */
> if ((pkt_color == e_RTE_METER_GREEN) && (tc >= pkt_len)) {
> m->tc = tc - pkt_len;
> m->te = te;
> return e_RTE_METER_GREEN;
> }
>
> if ((pkt_color != e_RTE_METER_RED) && (te >= pkt_len)) {
> m->tc = tc;
> m->te = te - pkt_len;
> return e_RTE_METER_YELLOW;
> }
>
> /* If we end up here the color is RED */
> m->tc = tc;
> m->te = te;
> return e_RTE_METER_RED;
>
> <snip>
>
> Thanks,
> Cristian
Asking all comments, sent out a V4.
//Eelco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-04 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-18 15:38 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] " Eelco Chaudron
2018-12-18 15:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] " Eelco Chaudron
2018-12-21 16:15 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2019-01-04 14:03 ` Eelco Chaudron [this message]
2018-12-18 15:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] test/test_meter: update meter test to include RFC4115 meters Eelco Chaudron
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=EDDB3D8F-CDD5-4E71-A5B3-08D51F571A35@redhat.com \
--to=echaudro@redhat.com \
--cc=cristian.dumitrescu@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
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).