Hi Yinan, We have done a comparative analysis and found with the old code the if(weak_barriers) and else branches were saved on x86 as rte_smp_wmb and rte_cio_wmb are identical. http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/drivers/net/virtio/virtqueue.h#n49 For the new code, with Joyce's patches applied, the branches were not saved, which requir additional cpu cycles, this caused slight degradation on x86.
The patches uplifted the performance on aarch64 about 9% as indicated in the cover letter. While I am thinking over a solution to the degradation on x86,could you help answer: 1. Is rte_cio_wmb is sufficient for the non weak-barrier case(HW offloading)? I got this question because I see in Intel NIC PMDs, it is almost never used, it is rte_wmb that is more widely used to notify the NIC device, any difference between the virtio ring compatible smartNIC device(or vDPA?) and i40e like devices? 2. If the rte_cio_wmb is not sufficient for this case and replaced by stronger barriers, like sfence, then the branches will not be saved by the compiler, then the problem becomes with the correct use of barriers, other than the degradation. Any comments are welcome! Best Regards, Gavin > -----Original Message----- > From: Wang, Yinan <yinan.w...@intel.com> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 11:54 AM > To: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com>; Joyce Kong (Arm > Technology China) <joyce.k...@arm.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: nd <n...@arm.com>; Bie, Tiwei <tiwei....@intel.com>; Wang, Zhihong > <zhihong.w...@intel.com>; amore...@redhat.com; Wang, Xiao W > <xiao.w.w...@intel.com>; Liu, Yong <yong....@intel.com>; > jfreim...@redhat.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli > <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) > <gavin...@arm.com> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for packed > vring > desc avail flags > > > Hi Joyce, > > I just test performance impact of your patch set with code base commit id: > d03d8622db48918d14bfe805641b1766ecc40088, after applying your v3 patch > set , seven paths of vhost/virtio pvp test shows performance drop as below: > > PVP vhost/virtio 1c1q test before apply patch apply patch > test_perf_pvp_inorder_mergeable 7.603 7.474 > test_perf_pvp_inorder_no_mergeable 7.642 7.525 > test_perf_pvp_mergeable 7.556 7.431 > test_perf_pvp_normal 7.554 7.478 > test_perf_pvp_vector_rx 7.581 7.469 > test_perf_pvp_virtio11_mergeable 7.068 6.905 > test_perf_pvp_virtio11_normal 7.088 6.888 > > Thanks, > Yinan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Maxime Coquelin > > Sent: 2019年9月9日 18:10 > > To: Joyce Kong <joyce.k...@arm.com>; dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: n...@arm.com; Bie, Tiwei <tiwei....@intel.com>; Wang, Zhihong > > <zhihong.w...@intel.com>; amore...@redhat.com; Wang, Xiao W > > <xiao.w.w...@intel.com>; Liu, Yong <yong....@intel.com>; > > jfreim...@redhat.com; honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com; > gavin...@arm.com > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for packed > vring > > desc avail flags > > > > > > > > On 9/9/19 11:14 AM, Joyce Kong wrote: > > > In case VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM(36) is not negotiated, then the > > > frontend and backend are assumed to be implemented in software, that > > > is they can run on identical CPUs in an SMP configuration. > > > Thus a weak form of memory barriers like rte_smp_r/wmb, other than > > > rte_cio_r/wmb, is sufficient for this case(vq->hw->weak_barriers == 1) > > > and yields better performance. > > > For the above case, this patch helps yielding even better performance > > > by replacing the two-way barriers with C11 one-way barriers for avail > > > flags in packed ring. > > > > > > Meanwhile, a read barrier is required to ensure ordering between > > > descriptor's flags and content reads[1]. With C11, load-acquire can > > > enforce the ordering instead of rmb barrier. > > > > > > [1]https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/49109/ > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joyce Kong <joyce.k...@arm.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Phil Yang <phil.y...@arm.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c | 13 +++++++------ > > > drivers/net/virtio/virtio_user/virtio_user_dev.c | 6 +++++- > > > drivers/net/virtio/virtqueue.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > > lib/librte_vhost/vhost.h | 2 +- > > > lib/librte_vhost/virtio_net.c | 11 +++++------ > > > 5 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com> > > > > Thanks, > > Maxime
