DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Medvedkin, Vladimir" <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>
To: Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
Cc: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication in rcu qsbr perf
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:01:55 +0000
Message-ID: <dab30781-ce8e-c55c-c4bc-3b61d29952e7@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73640BD5-01D1-4DE3-B0E8-5A3404734DD3@arm.com>

Hi,

On 03/11/2020 14:03, Dharmik Thakkar wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 2, 2020, at 11:32 PM, Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Avoid code duplication by combining single and multi threaded tests
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thakkar@arm.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> app/test/test_lpm_perf.c | 362
>>>>> ++++++++++-----------------------------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 271 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>>>>> index
>>>>> 224c92fa3d65..229c835c23f7 100644
>>>>> --- a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>>>>> +++ b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>>>>> @@ -67,6 +67,12 @@ enum {
>>>>> IP_CLASS_C
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> +enum {
>>>>> +SINGLE_WRITER = 1,
>>>>> +MULTI_WRITER_1,
>>>>> +MULTI_WRITER_2
>>>>> +};
>>>> Do we need this? Can we use the number of cores instead?
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are 3 combinations of writes (adds/deletes):
>>> 1. Write all the entries - in case of a single writer 2. Write half of the entries -
>>> in case of multiple writers 3. Write remaining half of the entries - in case of
>>> multiple writers
>>>
>>> So, I think this is required.
>> IMO, this is not scalable. Essentially, we need 2 parameters to divide the routes among each writer thread. We need 2 parameters, 1) total number of writers 2) the core ID in the linear space.
>> Creating a structure with these 2 and passing that to the writer thread would be better and scalable.
> 
> Yes, agreed this is only applicable for 2 writers. Currently, the multi writer test is only limited to a maximum of 2 writers.
> To support more number of writers, we need something like this (which I believe is in lines with your suggestion):
> 1. Calculate what each writer will write: single_insert = TOTAL_WRITES / num_writers
> 2. Pass core ID in linear space as an argument to the writer function: pos_core
> 3. Calculate si and ei in the writer function: si = pos_core * single_insert; ei = si + single_insert
> 

Agree to Honnappa suggestion, for me it looks good, better than previous 
implementation.

> I can update the patch to enable more than 2 writers.
> Do you also suggest we expand the scope of the test to test with more than 2 writers?
> This will increase the time for which the test is running (which currently is significant even with 2 writers).
> 

I don't see any reason to increase the number of writers more than 2.

>>
>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> /* struct route_rule_count defines the total number of rules in
>>>>> following a/b/c
>>>>> * each item in a[]/b[]/c[] is the number of common IP address class
>>>>> A/B/C, not
>>>>> * including the ones for private local network.
>>>>> @@ -430,11 +436,16 @@ test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer(void *arg)  {
>>> unsigned
>>>>> int i, j, si, ei; uint64_t begin, total_cycles; -uint8_t core_id =
>>>>> (uint8_t)((uintptr_t)arg);
>>>>> +uint8_t writer_id = (uint8_t)((uintptr_t)arg);
>>>>> uint32_t next_hop_add = 0xAA;
>>>>>
>>>>> -/* 2 writer threads are used */
>>>>> -if (core_id % 2 == 0) {
>>>>> +/* Single writer (writer_id = 1) */
>>>>> +if (writer_id == SINGLE_WRITER) {
>>>>> +si = 0;
>>>>> +ei = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +/* 2 Writers (writer_id = 2/3)*/
>>>>> +else if (writer_id == MULTI_WRITER_1) {
>>>>> si = 0;
>>>>> ei = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES / 2;
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> @@ -447,29 +458,35 @@ test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer(void *arg) for (i = 0;
>>>>> i < RCU_ITERATIONS; i++) {
>>>>> /* Add all the entries */
>>>>> for (j = si; j < ei; j++) {
>>>>> -pthread_mutex_lock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +pthread_mutex_lock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> if (rte_lpm_add(lpm, large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip,
>>>>> large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth,
>>>>> next_hop_add) != 0) {
>>>>> printf("Failed to add iteration %d, route# %d\n", i, j);
>>>>> -pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +
>>>>> pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> return -1;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Delete all the entries */
>>>>> for (j = si; j < ei; j++) {
>>>>> -pthread_mutex_lock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +pthread_mutex_lock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> if (rte_lpm_delete(lpm,
>>>>> large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip,
>>>>> large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth) != 0) { printf("Failed to delete
>>>>> iteration %d, route# %d\n", i, j); -pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +
>>>>> pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> return -1;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> +if (writer_id != SINGLE_WRITER)
>>>>> +pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -482,16 +499,17 @@ test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer(void *arg)
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * Functional test:
>>>>> - * 2 writers, rest are readers
>>>>> + * 1/2 writers, rest are readers
>>>>> */
>>>>> static int
>>>>> -test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(void)
>>>>> +test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(uint8_t use_rcu)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct rte_lpm_config config;
>>>>> size_t sz;
>>>>> -unsigned int i;
>>>>> +unsigned int i, j;
>>>>> uint16_t core_id;
>>>>> struct rte_lpm_rcu_config rcu_cfg = {0};
>>>>> +int (*reader_f)(void *arg) = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (rte_lcore_count() < 3) {
>>>>> printf("Not enough cores for lpm_rcu_perf_autotest, expecting at
>>>>> least 3\n"); @@ -504,273 +522,76 @@
>>>>> test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(void)
>>>>> num_cores++;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -printf("\nPerf test: 2 writers, %d readers, RCU integration
>>>>> enabled\n", -num_cores - 2);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Create LPM table */
>>>>> -config.max_rules = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -
>>> config.number_tbl8s =
>>>>> NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -config.flags = 0; -lpm =
>>>>> rte_lpm_create(__func__, SOCKET_ID_ANY, &config);
>>>>> -TEST_LPM_ASSERT(lpm != NULL);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Init RCU variable */
>>>>> -sz = rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize(num_cores);
>>>>> -rv = (struct rte_rcu_qsbr *)rte_zmalloc("rcu0", sz,
>>>>> -RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE); -rte_rcu_qsbr_init(rv, num_cores);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rcu_cfg.v = rv;
>>>>> -/* Assign the RCU variable to LPM */ -if (rte_lpm_rcu_qsbr_add(lpm,
>>>>> &rcu_cfg) != 0) { -printf("RCU variable assignment failed\n"); -goto
>>>>> error; -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 0;
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&gwrite_cycles, 0, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&thr_id, 0, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Launch reader threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 2; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_reader, NULL,
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Launch writer threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer,
>>>>> -(void *)(uintptr_t)i,
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Wait for writer threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
>>>>> -if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0) -goto error;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -printf("Total LPM Adds: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Total LPM
>>>>> Deletes: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Average LPM Add/Del:
>>>>> %"PRIu64" cycles\n", -__atomic_load_n(&gwrite_cycles,
>>>>> __ATOMIC_RELAXED) -/ TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 1;
>>>>> -/* Wait until all readers have exited */ -for (i = 2; i < num_cores;
>>>>> i++) -rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>> -rte_free(rv);
>>>>> -lpm = NULL;
>>>>> -rv = NULL;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Test without RCU integration */
>>>>> -printf("\nPerf test: 2 writers, %d readers, RCU integration
>>>>> disabled\n", -num_cores - 2);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Create LPM table */
>>>>> -config.max_rules = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -
>>> config.number_tbl8s =
>>>>> NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -config.flags = 0; -lpm =
>>>>> rte_lpm_create(__func__, SOCKET_ID_ANY, &config);
>>>>> -TEST_LPM_ASSERT(lpm != NULL);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 0;
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&gwrite_cycles, 0, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&thr_id, 0, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Launch reader threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 2; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_reader, NULL, -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Launch writer threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer,
>>>>> -(void *)(uintptr_t)i,
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Wait for writer threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
>>>>> -if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0) -goto error;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -printf("Total LPM Adds: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Total LPM
>>>>> Deletes: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Average LPM Add/Del:
>>>>> %"PRIu64" cycles\n", -__atomic_load_n(&gwrite_cycles,
>>>>> __ATOMIC_RELAXED) -/ TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 1;
>>>>> -/* Wait until all readers have exited */ -for (i = 2; i < num_cores;
>>>>> i++) -rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -return 0;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -error:
>>>>> -writer_done = 1;
>>>>> -/* Wait until all readers have exited */ -rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>> -rte_free(rv);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -return -1;
>>>>> -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/*
>>>>> - * Functional test:
>>>>> - * Single writer, rest are readers
>>>>> - */
>>>>> -static int
>>>>> -test_lpm_rcu_perf(void)
>>>>> -{
>>>>> -struct rte_lpm_config config;
>>>>> -uint64_t begin, total_cycles;
>>>>> -size_t sz;
>>>>> -unsigned int i, j;
>>>>> -uint16_t core_id;
>>>>> -uint32_t next_hop_add = 0xAA;
>>>>> -struct rte_lpm_rcu_config rcu_cfg = {0};
>>>>> -
>>>>> -if (rte_lcore_count() < 2) {
>>>>> -printf("Not enough cores for lpm_rcu_perf_autotest, expecting at
>>>>> least 2\n"); -return TEST_SKIPPED; -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> -num_cores = 0;
>>>>> -RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_WORKER(core_id) {
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[num_cores] = core_id; -num_cores++; -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> -printf("\nPerf test: 1 writer, %d readers, RCU integration
>>>>> enabled\n", -num_cores);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Create LPM table */
>>>>> -config.max_rules = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -
>>> config.number_tbl8s =
>>>>> NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -config.flags = 0; -lpm =
>>>>> rte_lpm_create(__func__, SOCKET_ID_ANY, &config);
>>>>> -TEST_LPM_ASSERT(lpm != NULL);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Init RCU variable */
>>>>> -sz = rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize(num_cores);
>>>>> -rv = (struct rte_rcu_qsbr *)rte_zmalloc("rcu0", sz,
>>>>> -RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE); -rte_rcu_qsbr_init(rv, num_cores);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rcu_cfg.v = rv;
>>>>> -/* Assign the RCU variable to LPM */ -if (rte_lpm_rcu_qsbr_add(lpm,
>>>>> &rcu_cfg) != 0) { -printf("RCU variable assignment failed\n"); -goto
>>>>> error; -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 0;
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&thr_id, 0, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Launch reader threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_reader, NULL,
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Measure add/delete. */
>>>>> -begin = rte_rdtsc_precise();
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < RCU_ITERATIONS; i++) {
>>>>> -/* Add all the entries */
>>>>> -for (j = 0; j < NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; j++) -if (rte_lpm_add(lpm,
>>>>> large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip, -large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth,
>>>>> -next_hop_add) != 0) {
>>>>> -printf("Failed to add iteration %d, route# %d\n", -i, j);
>>>>> +for (j = 1; j < 3; j++) {
>>>>> +if (use_rcu)
>>>>> +printf("\nPerf test: %d writer(s), %d reader(s),"
>>>>> +       " RCU integration enabled\n", j, num_cores - j); else
>>>>> +printf("\nPerf test: %d writer(s), %d reader(s),"
>>>>> +       " RCU integration disabled\n", j, num_cores - j);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/* Create LPM table */
>>>>> +config.max_rules = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES;
>>> config.number_tbl8s =
>>>>> +NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; config.flags = 0; lpm =
>>>>> +rte_lpm_create(__func__, SOCKET_ID_ANY, &config);
>>>>> +TEST_LPM_ASSERT(lpm != NULL);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/* Init RCU variable */
>>>>> +if (use_rcu) {
>>>>> +sz = rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize(num_cores);
>>>>> +rv = (struct rte_rcu_qsbr *)rte_zmalloc("rcu0", sz,
>>>>> +
>>>>> RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE);
>>>>> +rte_rcu_qsbr_init(rv, num_cores);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +rcu_cfg.v = rv;
>>>>> +/* Assign the RCU variable to LPM */ if (rte_lpm_rcu_qsbr_add(lpm,
>>>>> +&rcu_cfg) != 0) { printf("RCU variable assignment failed\n");
>>>>> goto error;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -/* Delete all the entries */
>>>>> -for (j = 0; j < NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; j++) -if
>>>>> (rte_lpm_delete(lpm, large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip,
>>>>> -large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth) != 0) { -printf("Failed to delete
>>>>> iteration %d, route# %d\n", -i, j); -goto error; -} -} -total_cycles
>>>>> = rte_rdtsc_precise() - begin;
>>>>> +reader_f = test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_reader; } else reader_f =
>>>>> +test_lpm_reader;
>>>>>
>>>>> -printf("Total LPM Adds: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Total LPM
>>>>> Deletes: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES); -printf("Average LPM Add/Del: %g
>>>>> cycles\n", -(double)total_cycles / TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> +writer_done = 0;
>>>>> +__atomic_store_n(&gwrite_cycles, 0, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
>>>>>
>>>>> -writer_done = 1;
>>>>> -/* Wait until all readers have exited */ -for (i = 0; i < num_cores;
>>>>> i++) -if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>> -rte_free(rv);
>>>>> -lpm = NULL;
>>>>> -rv = NULL;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Test without RCU integration */
>>>>> -printf("\nPerf test: 1 writer, %d readers, RCU integration
>>>>> disabled\n", -num_cores);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -/* Create LPM table */
>>>>> -config.max_rules = NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -
>>> config.number_tbl8s =
>>>>> NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; -config.flags = 0; -lpm =
>>>>> rte_lpm_create(__func__, SOCKET_ID_ANY, &config);
>>>>> -TEST_LPM_ASSERT(lpm != NULL);
>>>>> +__atomic_store_n(&thr_id, 0, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
>>>>>
>>>>> -writer_done = 0;
>>>>> -__atomic_store_n(&thr_id, 0, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
>>>>> +/* Launch reader threads */
>>>>> +for (i = j; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> +rte_eal_remote_launch(reader_f, NULL,
>>>>> +enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>>
>>>>> -/* Launch reader threads */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_reader, NULL,
>>>>> -enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> +/* Launch writer threads */
>>>>> +for (i = 0; i < j; i++)
>>>>> +rte_eal_remote_launch(test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer,
>>>>> +(void *)(uintptr_t)(i + j),
>>>> This can be just 'j'?
>>>>
>>>>> +enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>>
>>>>> -/* Measure add/delete. */
>>>>> -begin = rte_rdtsc_precise();
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < RCU_ITERATIONS; i++) {
>>>>> -/* Add all the entries */
>>>>> -for (j = 0; j < NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; j++)
>>>>> -if (rte_lpm_add(lpm, large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip,
>>>>> -large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth,
>>>>> -next_hop_add) != 0) {
>>>>> -printf("Failed to add iteration %d, route#
>>>>> %d\n",
>>>>> -i, j);
>>>>> +/* Wait for writer threads */
>>>>> +for (i = 0; i < j; i++)
>>>>> +if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
>>>>> goto error;
>>>>> -}
>>>>>
>>>>> -/* Delete all the entries */
>>>>> -for (j = 0; j < NUM_LDEPTH_ROUTE_ENTRIES; j++)
>>>>> -if (rte_lpm_delete(lpm,
>>>>> large_ldepth_route_table[j].ip,
>>>>> -large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth) != 0) {
>>>>> -printf("Failed to delete iteration %d, route#
>>>>> %d\n",
>>>>> -i, j);
>>>>> -goto error;
>>>>> -}
>>>>> +printf("Total LPM Adds: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> +printf("Total LPM Deletes: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> +printf("Average LPM Add/Del: %"PRIu64" cycles\n",
>>>>> +__atomic_load_n(&gwrite_cycles,
>>>>> __ATOMIC_RELAXED)
>>>>> +/ TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +writer_done = 1;
>>>>> +/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>>>>> +for (i = j; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> +rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>> +rte_free(rv);
>>>>> +lpm = NULL;
>>>>> +rv = NULL;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -total_cycles = rte_rdtsc_precise() - begin;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -printf("Total LPM Adds: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> -printf("Total LPM Deletes: %d\n", TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> -printf("Average LPM Add/Del: %g cycles\n",
>>>>> -(double)total_cycles / TOTAL_WRITES);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -writer_done = 1;
>>>>> -/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>>>>> -for (i = 0; i < num_cores; i++)
>>>>> -rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -946,9 +767,8 @@ test_lpm_perf(void)
>>>>> rte_lpm_delete_all(lpm);
>>>>> rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>>>>>
>>>>> -test_lpm_rcu_perf();
>>>>> -
>>>>> -test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer();
>>>>> +test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(0);
>>>>> +test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(1);
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.17.1
> 

-- 
Regards,
Vladimir

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-03 18:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-29 15:36 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-29 15:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 17:17   ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-02 22:11     ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 10:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation " David Marchand
2020-11-02 15:11 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-02 16:58   ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 17:21     ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-02 17:33     ` Bruce Richardson
2020-11-02 23:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:30     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:28     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:42       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  1:21     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:56       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-02 23:52   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  4:21     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  4:33       ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:32         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03 14:03           ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 14:51             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03 18:01             ` Medvedkin, Vladimir [this message]
2020-11-03  5:12   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:21       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03  5:22       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-03  5:12     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:23       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-03 22:35         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-11-04 15:46         ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 16:49           ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 18:58       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] test/lpm: fix cycle calculation in rcu qsbr perf Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:34           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-04 18:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] test/lpm: avoid code duplication " Dharmik Thakkar
2020-11-04 19:35           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-11-05 15:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] test/lpm: fix rcu qsbr perf test David Marchand

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=dab30781-ce8e-c55c-c4bc-3b61d29952e7@intel.com \
    --to=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
    --cc=Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=nd@arm.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

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