-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:45 PM
To: Richardson, Bruce <redacted>; Olivier Matz <redacted>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <redacted>; jblunck@infradead.org;
nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Richardson, Bruce
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
To: Olivier Matz <redacted>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <redacted>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
[off-list ref]; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:

quoted

Hi,

Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
Can it be applied?


Thanks,
Olivier

I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.

	/Bruce

quoted

In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
parts may be causing the problem.

Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
impact of this set may be?

I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
current version.

I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)

Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.

Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
like this.

Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.

Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
So it doesn't look like i40e specific.

Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
[dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
cmdline:
./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i

Konstantin