Hi Qi,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang, Qi Z <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2019 9:33 AM > To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <[email protected]>; Richardson, > Bruce <[email protected]>; Ananyev, Konstantin > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli > <[email protected]>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China) > <[email protected]>; Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China) > <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 6:01 PM > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <[email protected]>; Richardson, Bruce > > <[email protected]>; Ananyev, Konstantin > > <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli > > <[email protected]>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China) > > <[email protected]>; Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China) > > <[email protected]> > > Subject: RE: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue > > > > Hi Qi, > > > > Thanks for your explanation! > > I did some testing and found the barriers caused a big drop in RFC2544 NDR > > performance on aarch64, how about it on X86? > For x86, I think we don't have performance drop, the memory barrier just > change the compiler's behavior to avoid generate out of order read > instructions, and x86 guarantee no out of read execution, so it does not add > new instructions that cost CPU cycles. > > > Is it possible to count DD bits in a way of surviving across the > > out-of-order > > descriptors reading? > > I think it is possible, but this will impact performance on x86, > but for aarch64, you can try out to see if that benefit and do proper > optimization on related vPMD implementation. The patches for aarch64 are in community review, and performances gain were measured both for ixgbe and i40e vPMD. Very appreciate if you can further review and comment. Here are the patch links: IXGBE vPMD: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/57649/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/57650/ I40e vPMD: http://patches.dpdk.org/cover/57651/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/57652/ > > > > Best Regards, > > Gavin > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zhang, Qi Z <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 8:11 PM > > > To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <[email protected]>; Richardson, > > > Bruce <[email protected]>; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli > > > <[email protected]>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China) > > > <[email protected]> > > > Subject: RE: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue > > > > > > Hi Gavin: > > > > > > in vPMD, we read 4 or 8 packets as batch, we count DD bits for packet > > > received, but not check the if they are continues or not, we assume it > > > should always be 1000, 1100, 1110, 1111 ....(take batch size is 4 as > > > example) while the out of order read instruction generated by compiler > > > will cause driver to get un-continues DD bits, like 1011, the > > > descriptor on the hole actually is invalid since when it is read , > > > descriptor is not write back yet, but we still process this as 1110, it > > > cause > an > > corrupted mbuf returned. > > > > > > hope this is helpful. > > > > > > Regards > > > Qi > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 5:57 PM > > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <[email protected]>; Richardson, Bruce > > > > <[email protected]>; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli > > > > <[email protected]>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China) > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Subject: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue > > > > > > > > Hi Qi, > > > > > > > > I am working on optimizing the i40e vPMD on aarch64 and I see this > > > > patch relevant. > > > > Could you illuminate what issue this patch was fixing? > > > > I understand the PMD works at the driver layer, for delivery of L2 > packets. > > > > It does not own the responsibility to keep order(the responsibility > > > > lies with > > > the > > > > protocol stack, like TCP)? > > > > > > > > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/16665/ > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Gavin > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > > > > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > > > > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose > > > > the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store > > > > or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, > > please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to > any > > other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in > > any > > medium. Thank you. IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
