Hi Cheng,
Thanks for the new version. Please see inline.
Thanks,
Anoob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cheng Jiang <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 12:24 PM
> To: tho...@monjalon.net; bruce.richard...@intel.com;
> m...@smartsharesystems.com; chenbo....@intel.com; Amit Prakash Shukla
> <amitpraka...@marvell.com>; Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>;
> huangdeng...@huawei.com; kevin.la...@intel.com;
> fengcheng...@huawei.com; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
> <jer...@marvell.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jiayu...@intel.com; xuan.d...@intel.com;
> wenwux...@intel.com; yuanx.w...@intel.com; xingguang...@intel.com;
> weix.l...@intel.com; Cheng Jiang <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>
> Subject: [EXT] [PATCH v8] app/dma-perf: introduce dma-perf application
>
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> There are many high-performance DMA devices supported in DPDK now,
> and these DMA devices can also be integrated into other modules of DPDK as
> accelerators, such as Vhost. Before integrating DMA into applications,
> developers need to know the performance of these DMA devices in various
> scenarios and the performance of CPUs in the same scenario, such as
> different buffer lengths. Only in this way can we know the target
> performance of the application accelerated by using them. This patch
> introduces a high-performance testing tool, which supports comparing the
> performance of CPU and DMA in different scenarios automatically with a pre-
> set config file. Memory Copy performance test are supported for now.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cheng Jiang <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiayu Hu <jiayu...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yuan Wang <yuanx.w...@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
> Acked-by: Chenbo Xia <chenbo....@intel.com>
> ---
> v8:
> fixed string copy issue in parse_lcore();
> improved some data display format;
> added doc in doc/guides/tools;
> updated release notes;
>
> v7:
> fixed some strcpy issues;
> removed cache setup in calling rte_pktmbuf_pool_create();
> fixed some typos;
> added some memory free and null set operations;
> improved result calculation;
> v6:
> improved code based on Anoob's comments;
> fixed some code structure issues;
> v5:
> fixed some LONG_LINE warnings;
> v4:
> fixed inaccuracy of the memory footprint display;
> v3:
> fixed some typos;
> v2:
> added lcore/dmadev designation;
> added error case process;
> removed worker_threads parameter from config.ini;
> improved the logs;
> improved config file;
>
> app/meson.build | 1 +
> app/test-dma-perf/benchmark.c | 498 +++++++++++++++++++++
> app/test-dma-perf/config.ini | 61 +++
> app/test-dma-perf/main.c | 594 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> app/test-dma-perf/main.h | 69 +++
> app/test-dma-perf/meson.build | 17 +
> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_07.rst | 6 +
> doc/guides/tools/dmaperf.rst | 103 +++++
> doc/guides/tools/index.rst | 1 +
> 9 files changed, 1350 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 app/test-dma-perf/benchmark.c create mode 100644
> app/test-dma-perf/config.ini create mode 100644 app/test-dma-
> perf/main.c create mode 100644 app/test-dma-perf/main.h create mode
> 100644 app/test-dma-perf/meson.build create mode 100644
> doc/guides/tools/dmaperf.rst
>
<snip>
> +/* Configuration of device. */
> +static void
> +configure_dmadev_queue(uint32_t dev_id, uint32_t ring_size) {
> + uint16_t vchan = 0;
> + struct rte_dma_info info;
> + struct rte_dma_conf dev_config = { .nb_vchans = 1 };
> + struct rte_dma_vchan_conf qconf = {
> + .direction = RTE_DMA_DIR_MEM_TO_MEM,
> + .nb_desc = ring_size
> + };
> +
> + if (rte_dma_configure(dev_id, &dev_config) != 0)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Error with dma configure.\n");
> +
> + if (rte_dma_vchan_setup(dev_id, vchan, &qconf) != 0)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Error with queue configuration.\n");
> +
> + rte_dma_info_get(dev_id, &info);
[Anoob] This API can return errors. Better to add handling.
> + if (info.nb_vchans != 1)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Error, no configured queues
> reported on device id. %u\n",
> + dev_id);
> +
> + if (rte_dma_start(dev_id) != 0)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Error with dma start.\n"); }
> +
> +static int
> +config_dmadevs(struct test_configure *cfg) {
> + uint32_t ring_size = cfg->ring_size.cur;
> + struct lcore_dma_map_t *ldm = &cfg->lcore_dma_map;
> + uint32_t nb_workers = ldm->cnt;
> + uint32_t i;
> + int dev_id;
> + uint16_t nb_dmadevs = 0;
> + char *dma_name;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ldm->cnt; i++) {
> + dma_name = ldm->dma_names[i];
> + dev_id = rte_dma_get_dev_id_by_name(dma_name);
> + if (dev_id == -1) {
[Anoob] Can you check the above API definition? I think it returns not just -1
in case of errors.
> + fprintf(stderr, "Error: Fail to find DMA %s.\n",
> dma_name);
> + goto end;
> + }
> +
> + ldm->dma_ids[i] = dev_id;
> + configure_dmadev_queue(dev_id, ring_size);
> + ++nb_dmadevs;
> + }
> +
> +end:
> + if (nb_dmadevs < nb_workers) {
> + printf("Not enough dmadevs (%u) for all workers (%u).\n",
> nb_dmadevs, nb_workers);
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + printf("Number of used dmadevs: %u.\n", nb_dmadevs);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +do_dma_submit_and_poll(uint16_t dev_id, uint64_t *async_cnt,
> + volatile struct worker_info *worker_info) {
> + int ret;
> + uint16_t nr_cpl;
> +
> + ret = rte_dma_submit(dev_id, 0);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + rte_dma_stop(dev_id);
> + rte_dma_close(dev_id);
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Error with dma submit.\n");
> + }
> +
> + nr_cpl = rte_dma_completed(dev_id, 0, MAX_DMA_CPL_NB, NULL,
> NULL);
> + *async_cnt -= nr_cpl;
> + worker_info->total_cpl += nr_cpl;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int
> +do_dma_mem_copy(void *p)
[Anoob] Just curious, why not pass struct lcore_params *para itself? Is it
because the pointer is volatile? If yes, then we can take an AI to split the
struct into volatile and non-volatile parts.
> +{
> + const uint16_t *para_idx = (uint16_t *)p;
> + volatile struct lcore_params *para = lcores_p[*para_idx].v_ptr;
> + volatile struct worker_info *worker_info = &(para->worker_info);
> + const uint16_t dev_id = para->dev_id;
> + const uint32_t nr_buf = para->nr_buf;
> + const uint16_t kick_batch = para->kick_batch;
> + const uint32_t buf_size = para->buf_size;
> + struct rte_mbuf **srcs = para->srcs;
> + struct rte_mbuf **dsts = para->dsts;
> + uint16_t nr_cpl;
> + uint64_t async_cnt = 0;
> + uint32_t i;
> + uint32_t poll_cnt = 0;
> + int ret;
> +
> + worker_info->stop_flag = false;
> + worker_info->ready_flag = true;
> +
> + while (!worker_info->start_flag)
> + ;
> +
> + while (1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_buf; i++) {
> +dma_copy:
> + ret = rte_dma_copy(dev_id, 0,
> rte_pktmbuf_iova(srcs[i]),
> + rte_pktmbuf_iova(dsts[i]), buf_size, 0);
[Anoob] Do we need to use ' rte_mbuf_data_iova' here instead of
'rte_pktmbuf_iova'?
> + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> + if (ret == -ENOSPC) {
> + do_dma_submit_and_poll(dev_id,
> &async_cnt, worker_info);
> + goto dma_copy;
> + } else {
> + /* Error exit */
> + rte_dma_stop(dev_id);
[Anoob] Missing rte_dma_close() here. Also, may be introduce a static void
function so that rte_exit call etc won't be part of the fastpath loop.
May be something like below and you can call it from here and
"do_dma_submit_and_poll".
static void
error_exit(int dev_id)
{
/* Error exit */
rte_dma_stop(dev_id);
rte_dma_close(dev_id);
rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "DMA enqueue failed\n");
}
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "DMA
> enqueue failed\n");
> + }
> + }
> + async_cnt++;
> +
> + if ((async_cnt % kick_batch) == 0)
> + do_dma_submit_and_poll(dev_id,
> &async_cnt, worker_info);
> + }
> +
> + if (worker_info->stop_flag)
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + rte_dma_submit(dev_id, 0);
> + while ((async_cnt > 0) && (poll_cnt++ < POLL_MAX)) {
> + nr_cpl = rte_dma_completed(dev_id, 0,
> MAX_DMA_CPL_NB, NULL, NULL);
> + async_cnt -= nr_cpl;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
<snip>
> +static int
> +setup_memory_env(struct test_configure *cfg, struct rte_mbuf ***srcs,
> + struct rte_mbuf ***dsts)
> +{
> + unsigned int buf_size = cfg->buf_size.cur;
> + unsigned int nr_sockets;
> + uint32_t nr_buf = cfg->nr_buf;
> +
> + nr_sockets = rte_socket_count();
> + if (cfg->src_numa_node >= nr_sockets ||
> + cfg->dst_numa_node >= nr_sockets) {
> + printf("Error: Source or destination numa exceeds the acture
> numa nodes.\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + src_pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create("Benchmark_DMA_SRC",
> + nr_buf,
> + 0,
> + 0,
> + buf_size + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM,
> + cfg->src_numa_node);
> + if (src_pool == NULL) {
> + PRINT_ERR("Error with source mempool creation.\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + dst_pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create("Benchmark_DMA_DST",
> + nr_buf,
> + 0,
> + 0,
> + buf_size + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM,
> + cfg->dst_numa_node);
> + if (dst_pool == NULL) {
> + PRINT_ERR("Error with destination mempool creation.\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + *srcs = rte_malloc(NULL, nr_buf * sizeof(struct rte_mbuf *), 0);
> + if (*srcs == NULL) {
> + printf("Error: srcs malloc failed.\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + *dsts = rte_malloc(NULL, nr_buf * sizeof(struct rte_mbuf *), 0);
> + if (*dsts == NULL) {
> + printf("Error: dsts malloc failed.\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + if (rte_mempool_get_bulk(src_pool, (void **)*srcs, nr_buf) != 0) {
[Anoob] Might be better to use 'rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk' since we use '
rte_mbuf_data_iova' in the datapath and it is desirable to initialize it
properly as an mbuf. Same comment below as well.
<snip>
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nb_workers; i++) {
> + calc_result(buf_size, nr_buf, nb_workers, test_secs,
> + lcores_p[i].v_ptr->worker_info.test_cpl,
> + &memory, &avg_cycles, &bandwidth, &mops);
> + output_result(cfg->scenario_id, lcores_p[i].v_ptr->lcore_id,
> + lcores_p[i].v_ptr->dma_name,
> avg_cycles, buf_size,
> + nr_buf / nb_workers, memory,
> bandwidth, mops, is_dma);
> + }
[Anoob] Can you also print total_bandwidth & total_mops? It can be a simple
aggregation in the above loop. Would help when we are dealing with larger
number of queues but single hardware block.
> +
> +out:
> + /* free mbufs used in the test */
> + if (srcs)
[Anoob] DPDK coding guidelines recommend a usage like below,
(if (srcs != NULL)
> + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(srcs, nr_buf);
> + if (dsts)
> + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(dsts, nr_buf);
> +
> + /* free the points for the mbufs */
> + rte_free(srcs);
> + srcs = NULL;
> + rte_free(dsts);
> + dsts = NULL;
> +
> + if (src_pool) {
> + rte_mempool_free(src_pool);
> + src_pool = NULL;
> + }
> + if (dst_pool) {
> + rte_mempool_free(dst_pool);
> + src_pool = NULL;
[Anoob] Should be dst_pool, right?
<snip>
> diff --git a/app/test-dma-perf/main.h b/app/test-dma-perf/main.h new file
> mode 100644 index 0000000000..215ac42673
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/app/test-dma-perf/main.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> + * Copyright(c) 2023 Intel Corporation
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef _MAIN_H_
> +#define _MAIN_H_
> +
> +
> +#include <rte_common.h>
> +#include <rte_cycles.h>
> +#include <rte_dev.h>
> +#include <rte_dmadev.h>
[Anoob] Is the above include (rte_dmadev.h) required?
> +
> +#ifndef __maybe_unused
> +#define __maybe_unused __rte_unused
> +#endif
[Anoob] Can you try to avoid this and use rte_unused or RTE_SET_USED in the
cache_flush_buf() function?
