All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Sergey Vyazmitinov <s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kni: fast data availability check in thread_single loop
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:35:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1d063572-a495-ce22-b605-7c748f980b61@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK_zqSO5U7JQnwChS=1Emp_ZPc_+TixZiT6hBDqv846GtQEs9Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 1/18/2017 11:05 AM, Sergey Vyazmitinov wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>> wrote:
> 

<...>

>     &knet->kni_list_head, list) {
>     > +     for (i = 0; i < KNI_RX_DATA_LOOP_NUM; ++i) {
> 
>     When there are multiple KNI interfaces, and lets assume there is traffic
>     too, this will behave like:
> 
>     KNI1x2500 data_packets + KNI2x2500 data_packets .... KNI10x2500
> 
>     After data packets, KNI1 resp_packet + KNI2 resp_packets ...
> 
>     Won't this scenario also may cause latency? And perhaps jitter according
>     KNI interface traffic loads?
> 
>     This may be good for some use cases, but not sure if this is good
>     for all.
> 
> We can decrease KNI_RX_DATA_LOOP_NUM to some reasonable value.
> I can make test to find lower bound.

I believe the effect of these changes differ per use case, and load on
interfaces, may not work as well for everybody.

> Also, the point is in fast check for a new data in interface rx queue.
> May be will be better add some kind of break after several kni_net_rx calls.
> Without them loop ends very quickly.
> Anyway, this patch decrease average latency in my case from 4.5ms to 

4.5ms is too slow, can there be any other issue?

> 0.011ms in ping test with 100000 packets.

<...>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-18 12:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-29 23:23 [PATCH] kni: fast data availability check in thread_single loop Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-11 17:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-18 11:05   ` Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-18 12:35     ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2017-01-18 13:11     ` Jay Rolette
2017-03-10 12:59       ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-03-10 13:16         ` Jay Rolette

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1d063572-a495-ce22-b605-7c748f980b61@intel.com \
    --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.