Hello, Thanks for your comments. Please see my comments inline tagged with [HY].
> 04/12/2020 08:51, Hideyuki Yamashita: > > In general, DPDK application consumes CPU usage because it polls > > incoming packets using rx_burst API in infinite loop. > > This makes difficult to estimate how much CPU usage is really > > used to send/receive packets by the DPDK application. > > > > For example, even if no incoming packets arriving, CPU usage > > looks nearly 100% when observed by top command. > > > > It is beneficial if developers can observe real CPU usage of the > > DPDK application. > > Such information can be exported to monitoring application like > > prometheus/graphana and shows CPU usage graphically. > > > > To achieve above, this patch set provides apistats functionality. > > apistats provides the followiing two counters for each lcore. > > - rx_burst_counts[RTE_MAX_LCORE] > > - tx_burst_counts[RTE_MAX_LCORE] > > Those accumulates rx_burst/tx_burst counts since the application starts. > > Please could you compare with what rte_jobstats offers? > http://code.dpdk.org/dpdk/latest/source/lib/librte_jobstats/rte_jobstats.h > > I feel all of this shares the same goals as librte_power work. [HY] Thanks for your commetns. You are correct. As you well know, l3fwd-power measures "how cpu cores are busy". And in that sense, the goal of my proposal is the same with yours . Moreover l3fwd-power is more precise than my proposal. Point of my proposal is - more easy to use - less code impact on application code I think that if application developer wants to need to measure "how cpu cores are busy" he/she will needs to implement - logic similar with l3fwd-power or - use jobstats API But it is rather heavy for existing applications. By using my proposal, it is "much easier" to implement. (But it is "rough" measurement. I think it is trade-off) How do you think about the idea? > [...] > > - basic API counting functionality(apistats) into librte_ethdev > > Could it be it be accessible via rte_telemetry? > http://code.dpdk.org/dpdk/latest/source/lib/librte_telemetry/rte_telemetry.h > [HY] OK. Currently, no reason not using telemetry. I think telemetry is useful for applications which does NOT call DPDK API(C lang API) directly. My patchset provide only C API to retrieve apistats. But if assuming not all applications call C API, then I think it is reasonable to add telemetry in addition to C API for exposing stats. Do you think "exposure via C API" is not needed? Thanks! BR, Hideyuki Yamashita NTT TechnoCross
