> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 5, 2023 9:42 PM
> To: Yan, Zhirun <zhirun....@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jer...@marvell.com; kirankum...@marvell.com;
> ndabilpu...@marvell.com; step...@networkplumber.org;
> pbhagavat...@marvell.com; Liang, Cunming <cunming.li...@intel.com>; Wang,
> Haiyue <haiyue.w...@intel.com>; mattias.ronnblom
> <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 15/17] examples/l3fwd-graph: introduce multicore
> dispatch worker model
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 4:57 PM Zhirun Yan <zhirun....@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add new parameter "model" to choose mcore dispatch or rtc model.
> > And in dispatch model, the node will affinity to worker core successively.
> >
> > Note:
> > RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT is set to GRAPH_MODEL_RTC by default. Must
> set
> > model the same as RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT If set it as rtc or mcore
> > dispatch explicitly. GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_RUNTIME_SELECT means it could
> > choose by model in runtime.
> > Only support one RX node for mcore dispatch model in current
> > implementation.
> >
> > ./dpdk-l3fwd-graph -l 8,9,10,11 -n 4 -- -p 0x1 --config="(0,0,9)" -P
> > --model="dispatch"
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.w...@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Cunming Liang <cunming.li...@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhirun Yan <zhirun....@intel.com>
> > ---
> > examples/l3fwd-graph/main.c | 231 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > lib/graph/rte_graph_worker.h | 3 +
> > 2 files changed, 196 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/examples/l3fwd-graph/main.c b/examples/l3fwd-graph/main.c
> > index 5feeab4f0f..4ecc6c9af4 100644
> > --- a/examples/l3fwd-graph/main.c
> > +++ b/examples/l3fwd-graph/main.c
> > @@ -23,6 +23,12 @@
> > #include <rte_cycles.h>
> > #include <rte_eal.h>
> > #include <rte_ethdev.h>
> > +#define GRAPH_MODEL_RTC 0 /* Run-to-completion model, set by default.
> > +*/ #define GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_DISPATCH 1 /* Dispatch model. */
> #define
> > +GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_RUNTIME_SELECT 2 /* Support to select model by
> */
> > + /* parsing model in
> > +cmdline. */
>
> After moving model to graph->model, Can you check the performance.
In my env, I test l3fwd-graph, I got the same throughput.(slight improve could
be treated as jitter)
For graph_perf_autotest in test app, there is slight drop (About 0.2% call,
similar cycles/call)
Can it be treated as jitter?
Old:
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
|Node |calls |objs |realloc_count
|objs/call |objs/sec(10E6) |cycles/call|
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
|test_graph_perf_worker-0-0 |10175176 |2604845056 |1
|256.000 |2015.394304 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-1-0 |10175542 |2604938752 |1
|256.000 |2015.488000 |28.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-2-0 |10175565 |2604944640 |1
|256.000 |2015.493888 |28.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-3-0 |10175593 |2604951808 |1
|256.000 |2015.501056 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_source-0 |10175623 |2604959488 |2
|256.000 |2015.508480 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_sink-0 |10175642 |2604964352 |1
|256.000 |2015.513600 |27.0000 |
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
New:
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
|Node |calls |objs |realloc_count
|objs/call |objs/sec(10E6) |cycles/call|
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
|test_graph_perf_worker-0-0 |10154953 |2599667968 |1
|256.000 |2010.960128 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-1-0 |10155316 |2599760896 |1
|256.000 |2011.053056 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-2-0 |10155338 |2599766528 |1
|256.000 |2011.058688 |28.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_worker-3-0 |10155357 |2599771392 |1
|256.000 |2011.063552 |28.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_source-0 |10155394 |2599780864 |2
|256.000 |2011.072768 |27.0000 |
|test_graph_perf_sink-0 |10155422 |2599788032 |1
|256.000 |2011.080192 |27.0000 |
+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+-----------+
> This may not be needed for l3fwd
>
Do you mean graph->model?
> or if there is not much code duplication,
>
> Do the following remove the limitation,
> #define RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_RTC.
>
> graph_main_loop change to graph_main_rtc_loop
>
> #define RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_DISPATCH
>
> graph_main_loop change to graph_main_mcore_loop
>
> Select the following based on runtime option
> /* Launch per-lcore init on every worker lcore */
> rte_eal_mp_remote_launch(graph_main_rtc_loop, NULL, SKIP_MAIN); or
> rte_eal_mp_remote_launch(graph_main_mcore_loop, NULL, SKIP_MAIN);
>
We want to 1. Use same API (rte_graph_walk()) for diff models.
2. no performance drop for rtc (use RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT in compile time)
If I understand correctly, I need remove graph->model and only use
RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT to select models?
And change it as
graph_main_rtc_loop()
{
While(1)
rte_graph_walk_rtc()
}
But actually, I think graph->model is need, especially for config stage and for
runtime config
If set RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT_RUNTIME.
We need the model type to decide to alloc workqueue and use
RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT
to choose the walk.
> > memset(&rewrite_data, 0, sizeof(rewrite_data));
> > rewrite_len = sizeof(rewrite_data); diff --git
> > a/lib/graph/rte_graph_worker.h b/lib/graph/rte_graph_worker.h index
> > 541c373cb1..19b4c1514f 100644
> > --- a/lib/graph/rte_graph_worker.h
> > +++ b/lib/graph/rte_graph_worker.h
> > @@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ __rte_experimental
> > static inline void
> > rte_graph_walk(struct rte_graph *graph) {
> > +#define RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_RTC 0
> > +#define RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_DISPATCH 1
>
> No need for duplicate enum. Please remove enum make this as in public header
> file.
>
Yes, it will cause no defined warnings.
Thanks for your comments.
I will remove enum and define model type macros in public header. And also
change
the related structs/APIs.
>
> > +
>
> Add comment here, On how application uses this, aka. before inlcuding the
> worker header file #define RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT
> RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_RTC.
> Please change the text as needed.
Yes, I will add comment and add the usage in document.
>
>
> > #if !defined(RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT) || RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT ==
> RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_RTC
> > rte_graph_walk_rtc(graph);
> > #elif RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_SELECT ==
> RTE_GRAPH_MODEL_MCORE_DISPATCH
> > --
> > 2.37.2
> >
