<snip>
> >
> > > > I have applied your
> > > > suggestion in 6/6 in v6 along with my corrections. The
> > > > rte_ring_elem test cases are added in 3/6. I have verified that they are
> running fine (they are done for 64b alone, will add more). Hopefully, there
> are
> no more errors.
> >
> > Applied v6 and re-run the tests.
> > Functional test passes ok on my boxes.
> > Pert-tests numbers below.
> > As I can see pretty much same pattern as in v5 remains:
> > MP/MC on 2 different cores
>
> Forgot to add: for 8 elems, for 32 - new ones always better.
>
> > and SP/SC single enq/deq
> > show lower numbers for _elem_.
> > For others _elem_ numbers are about the same or higher.
> > Personally, I am ok to go ahead with these changes.
> > Konstantin
> >
> > A - ring_perf_autotes
> > B - ring_perf_elem_autotest
> >
> > ### Testing single element and burst enq/deq ### A B
> > SP/SC single enq/dequeue: 8.27 10.94
> > MP/MC single enq/dequeue: 56.11 47.43
> > SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 4.20 3.50
> > MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 9.93 9.29
> > SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 2.93 1.94
> > MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 4.10 3.35
> >
> > ### Testing empty dequeue ###
> > SC empty dequeue: 2.00 3.00
> > MC empty dequeue: 3.00 2.00
> >
> > ### Testing using a single lcore ###
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 4.06 3.30
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 9.84 9.28
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 2.93 1.88
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 4.10 3.32
> >
> > ### Testing using two hyperthreads ###
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 9.22 8.83
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 15.73 15.86
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 5.78 3.83
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 6.33 4.53
> >
> > ### Testing using two physical cores ###
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 23.78 19.32
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 68.54 71.97
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 11.99 10.77
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 21.96 18.66
> >
> > ### Testing using two NUMA nodes ###
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 50.13 33.92
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 177.98 195.87
> > SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 32.98 23.12
> > MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 55.86 48.76
Thanks Konstantin. The performance of 5/6 is mostly worst than 6/6. So, we
should not consider 5/6 (will not be included in the future).
A - ring_perf_autotest (existing code)
B - ring_perf_elem_autotest (6/6)
Numbers from my side:
On one Arm platform:
### Testing single element and burst enq/deq ### A B
SP/SC single enq/dequeue: 1.04 1.06 (1.92)
MP/MC single enq/dequeue: 1.46 1.51 (3.42)
SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 0.18 0.17 (-5.55)
MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 0.23 0.22 (-4.34)
SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.05 0.05 (0)
MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.07 0.06 (-14.28)
### Testing empty dequeue ###
SC empty dequeue: 0.27 0.27 (0)
MC empty dequeue: 0.27 0.27 (0)
### Testing using a single lcore ###
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 0.18 0.17 (-5.55)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 0.23 0.23 (0)
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.05 0.05 (0)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.07 0.06 (0)
### Testing using two physical cores ###
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 0.79 0.79 (0)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 1.42 1.37 (-3.52)
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.20 0.20 (0)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.33 0.35 (6.06)
On another Arm platform:
### Testing single element and burst enq/deq ### A B
SP/SC single enq/dequeue: 11.54 11.79 (2.16)
MP/MC single enq/dequeue: 11.84 12.54 (5.91)
SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 1.51 1.33 (-11.92)
MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 8): 1.91 1.73 (-9.42)
SP/SC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.62 0.42 (-32.25)
MP/MC burst enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.72 0.52 (-27.77)
### Testing empty dequeue ###
SC empty dequeue: 2.48 2.48 (0)
MC empty dequeue: 2.48 2.48 (0)
### Testing using a single lcore ###
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 1.52 1.33 (-12.5)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 1.92 1.73 (-9.89)
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.62 0.42 (-32.25)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 0.72 0.52 (-27.77)
### Testing using two physical cores ###
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 6.30 6.57 (4.28)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 8): 10.59 10.45 (-1.32)
SP/SC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 1.92 1.58 (-17.70)
MP/MC bulk enq/dequeue (size: 32): 2.51 2.47 (-1.59)
From my side, I would say let us just go with patch 2/6.
Jerin/David, any opinion on your side?
