From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
To: "Chautru, Nicolas" <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"akhil.goyal@nxp.com" <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Cc: "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:24:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f8f2ef64-b595-e27b-293f-0fa2403d87e7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR11MB44514C7E05AC43FBE74760BBF8190@BY5PR11MB4451.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/26/20 9:04 AM, Chautru, Nicolas wrote:
>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 6:33 AM
>> To: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
>> akhil.goyal@nxp.com
>> Cc: david.marchand@redhat.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload
>>
>>
>> On 10/23/20 4:42 PM, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
>>> Replacing magic number for default wait time for hw offload.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
>>> Acked-by: Liu Tianjiao <tianjiao.liu@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 9 +++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> index f30cbdb..39f06db 100644
>>> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>>>
>>> #define MAX_QUEUES RTE_MAX_LCORE
>>> #define TEST_REPETITIONS 1000
>>> +#define WAIT_OFFLOAD_US 1000
>> Why wasn't 200 used ?
>>
>> Tom
> 1ms is a more typical expectation for workload (TTI in numerology 0 for 5GNR and LTE).
That's fine, i was only commenting because it changed.
Tom
>
>
>>> #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_BBDEV_FPGA_LTE_FEC #include
>> <fpga_lte_fec.h>
>>> @@ -4451,7 +4452,7 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
>> active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4542,7 +4543,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4630,7 +4631,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4713,7 +4714,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-28 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-23 23:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/7] BBDEV test updates Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/7] app/bbdev: add explicit ut for latency vs validation Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 12:55 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 17:30 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:37 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/7] app/bbdev: add explicit check for counters Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:05 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:29 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:31 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/7] app/bbdev: include explicit HARQ preloading Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:31 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:50 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:33 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:33 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:04 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:24 ` Tom Rix [this message]
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/7] app/bbdev: skip bler ut when compression is used Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:35 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/7] app/bbdev: reduce duration of throughput test Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:39 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 7/7] app/bbdev: update offload test to dequeue full ring Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:55 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:27 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:28 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-24 7:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/7] BBDEV test updates 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=f8f2ef64-b595-e27b-293f-0fa2403d87e7@redhat.com \
--to=trix@redhat.com \
--cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=nicolas.chautru@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).