> -----Original Message----- > From: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 1:45 PM > To: Amber, Kumar <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Stokes, Ian > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; Van Haaren, > Harry <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] MFEX Optimizations IPv6 + Hashing > > On 9/21/21 12:23, Kumar Amber wrote: > > --- > > v3: > > - rebase to master. > > v2: > > - fix the CI build. > > - fix check-patch for co-author. > > --- > > > > The patch-set introduces AVX512 optimizations of IPv6 > > traffic profiles and hashing improvements for all AVX512 > > supported traffic profiles for IPv4 and IPv6. > > > > Kumar Amber (6): > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Add AVX512 basic ipv6 traffic profiles > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Add AVX512 vlan ipv6 traffic profiles > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Add packet hash check to autovalidator > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Add ipv4 profile based hashing > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Add ipv6 profile based hashing > > dpif-netdev/mfex: Avoid hashing when opt mfex called > > > > NEWS | 7 + > > lib/automake.mk | 1 + > > lib/dpif-netdev-avx512.c | 6 +- > > lib/dpif-netdev-extract-avx512.c | 348 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > lib/dpif-netdev-private-extract.c | 63 +++++- > > lib/dpif-netdev-private-extract.h | 12 ++ > > tests/pcap/mfex_test.pcap | Bin 416 -> 632 bytes > > 7 files changed, 432 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > Hi. A few months ago I was told that it's easy for Intel to set up CI > to test upstream patches with AVX512 features enabled. Is there any > progress on that front?
Yes there is progress on that front, as you know Ian and Aaron are working on that, and status updates available if you're particularly interested in its progress. > My point is that we should refrain from adding new features in this > area until we have a proper CI. There is already various CI efforts for OVS, and as you know there is ongoing efforts to add AVX512 specifically, and report back on patchwork. > Especially considering the unit test failure you reported yesterday, which is > supposedly related to AVX512 optimizations. I don't know why you say this is related to AVX512 - it is not. See the detailed reply Amber sent with details of how the test-case assumed SW based murmur hash output. > // Marking this patch-set as deferred for now. This is not acceptable, deferring patchsets just because the AVX512 CI isn't in place was never agreed on. I do not like that AVX512 was "blamed" for the above unit-test failure, and now other AVX512 patchsets are being deferred and ignored as a result of that mistaken blame. @Amber, Kumar, please mark this v3 patchset as "new". > Best regards, Ilya Maximets. Regards, -Harry _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
