On 10/13/2020 8:11 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:22 PM Ananyev, Konstantin
<konstantin.anan...@intel.com> wrote:
On 10/6/2020 11:13 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 5:35 PM
To: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com>
Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; Richardson, Bruce
<bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
<konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Van Haaren, Harry
<harry.van.haa...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; jer...@marvell.com; nd
<n...@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] event/sw: performance improvements
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 2:32 PM Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com> wrote:
a concern that another library not uses public ring API,
but instead accesses ring internals directly. Obviously such coding practice is
not welcomed
as it makes harder to maintain/extend ring library in future.
About 2) - these new API can(/shoud) be marked an experimental anyway.
As another thing - it is still unclear what a performance gain we are talking
about here.
Is it really worth it comparing to just using SP/SC?
The change itself came after I analyzed the memory bound sections of the
code, and I just did a quick test, I got about 3.5% improvement in
throughput, maybe not so much but significant for such a small change,
and depending on the usecase it may be more.
As for the implementation itself, I would favour having a custom ring
like container in the PMD code, this will solve the issue of using
rte_ring internals while still allow for full optimisation. If this is
acceptable, I will follow up by tomorrow.
Sounds ok to me.
Nicolau Radu,
Could you supersede this patch, if the plan is to send it to a new
version based on a custom ring?
The v3 (https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/79879/) sent last week
implements the custom ring and does not use the rte_ring internals. v1
and v2 are superseded.
