Hi Anoob,
Replies are inline.
Thanks,
Cheng
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 1:42 PM
> To: Jiang, Cheng1 <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
> m...@smartsharesystems.com; Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>; Amit
> Prakash Shukla <amitpraka...@marvell.com>; huangdeng...@huawei.com;
> Laatz, Kevin <kevin.la...@intel.com>; fengcheng...@huawei.com; Jerin
> Jacob Kollanukkaran <jer...@marvell.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>; Ding, Xuan
> <xuan.d...@intel.com>; Ma, WenwuX <wenwux...@intel.com>; Wang,
> YuanX <yuanx.w...@intel.com>; He, Xingguang <xingguang...@intel.com>;
> Ling, WeiX <weix.l...@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH v8] app/dma-perf: introduce dma-perf application
>
> Hi Cheng,
>
> Please see inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Anoob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jiang, Cheng1 <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2023 5:23 PM
> > To: Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
> > m...@smartsharesystems.com; Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>; Amit
> > Prakash Shukla <amitpraka...@marvell.com>;
> huangdeng...@huawei.com;
> > Laatz, Kevin <kevin.la...@intel.com>; fengcheng...@huawei.com; Jerin
> > Jacob Kollanukkaran <jer...@marvell.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>; Ding, Xuan
> > <xuan.d...@intel.com>; Ma, WenwuX <wenwux...@intel.com>; Wang,
> YuanX
> > <yuanx.w...@intel.com>; He, Xingguang <xingguang...@intel.com>; Ling,
> > WeiX <weix.l...@intel.com>
> > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH v8] app/dma-perf: introduce dma-perf
> > application
> >
> > Hi Anoob,
> >
> > Replies are inline.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Cheng
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2023 2:53 PM
> > > To: Jiang, Cheng1 <cheng1.ji...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> > > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
> > > m...@smartsharesystems.com; Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>;
> Amit
> > > Prakash Shukla <amitpraka...@marvell.com>;
> > huangdeng...@huawei.com;
> > > Laatz, Kevin <kevin.la...@intel.com>; fengcheng...@huawei.com; Jerin
> > > Jacob Kollanukkaran <jer...@marvell.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Hu, Jiayu <jiayu...@intel.com>; Ding, Xuan
> > > <xuan.d...@intel.com>; Ma, WenwuX <wenwux...@intel.com>; Wang,
> > YuanX
> > > <yuanx.w...@intel.com>; He, Xingguang <xingguang...@intel.com>;
> > Ling,
> > > WeiX <weix.l...@intel.com>
> > > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH v8] app/dma-perf: introduce dma-perf
> > > application
> > >
> > > 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>
>
> > >
> > > > + 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.
> >
> > [Cheng] The reason I did it this way is because I want to launch this
> > function on another core by spawning a new thread, and
> > rte_eal_remote_launch() takes a void * as the parameter. That's why I
> > passed void *p. Your suggestion to split the struct into volatile and
> > non-volatile parts is quite reasonable. I am thinking about the best way to
> implement it. Thanks.
>
> [Anoob] Instead of passing the address of index variable as void *, you can
> easily send lcore_params pointer, right?
>
[Cheng] Yes, you are right. I can pass the lcore_params pointer. And I'll fix
it in the next version. The new lcore_params will be non-volatile with volatile
worker_info in it. This is more reasonable.
> >
> > >
> > > > +{
> > > > + 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'?
> >
> > [Cheng] yes rte_mbuf_data_iova is more appropriate, I'll fix it in the
> > next version. Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > > + 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"); }
> > >
> >
> > [Cheng] I'm not so sure here. rte_dma_close() is called in the
> > rte_exit(). Do we still call it explicitly before rte_exit()?
>
> [Anoob] In ' do_dma_submit_and_poll', there is rte_dma_close() before
> rte_exit(). I'm fine either way as long is it is consistent. Said that, I
> think it is
> better to call close() from app, rather than relying on rte_exit.
>
[Cheng] sure, it makes sense to me that app should call rte_dma_close(), I'll
fix it in the next version. Thanks.
> <snip>
