From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
To: "Chautru, Nicolas" <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"akhil.goyal@nxp.com" <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Cc: "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:24:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f8f2ef64-b595-e27b-293f-0fa2403d87e7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR11MB44514C7E05AC43FBE74760BBF8190@BY5PR11MB4451.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/26/20 9:04 AM, Chautru, Nicolas wrote:
>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 6:33 AM
>> To: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
>> akhil.goyal@nxp.com
>> Cc: david.marchand@redhat.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload
>>
>>
>> On 10/23/20 4:42 PM, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
>>> Replacing magic number for default wait time for hw offload.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
>>> Acked-by: Liu Tianjiao <tianjiao.liu@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 9 +++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> index f30cbdb..39f06db 100644
>>> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
>>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>>>
>>> #define MAX_QUEUES RTE_MAX_LCORE
>>> #define TEST_REPETITIONS 1000
>>> +#define WAIT_OFFLOAD_US 1000
>> Why wasn't 200 used ?
>>
>> Tom
> 1ms is a more typical expectation for workload (TTI in numerology 0 for 5GNR and LTE).
That's fine, i was only commenting because it changed.
Tom
>
>
>>> #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_BBDEV_FPGA_LTE_FEC #include
>> <fpga_lte_fec.h>
>>> @@ -4451,7 +4452,7 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
>> active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4542,7 +4543,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4630,7 +4631,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise(); @@ -4713,7 +4714,7
>> @@ typedef
>>> int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
>>> time_st->enq_acc_total_time += stats.acc_offload_cycles;
>>>
>>> /* give time for device to process ops */
>>> - rte_delay_us(200);
>>> + rte_delay_us(WAIT_OFFLOAD_US);
>>>
>>> /* Start time meas for dequeue function offload latency */
>>> deq_start_time = rte_rdtsc_precise();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-28 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-23 23:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/7] BBDEV test updates Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/7] app/bbdev: add explicit ut for latency vs validation Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 12:55 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 17:30 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:37 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/7] app/bbdev: add explicit check for counters Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:05 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:29 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:31 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/7] app/bbdev: include explicit HARQ preloading Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:31 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:50 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:33 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/7] app/bbdev: define wait for offload Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:33 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:04 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:24 ` Tom Rix [this message]
2020-10-23 23:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/7] app/bbdev: skip bler ut when compression is used Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:35 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/7] app/bbdev: reduce duration of throughput test Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:39 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-23 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 7/7] app/bbdev: update offload test to dequeue full ring Nicolas Chautru
2020-10-26 13:55 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-26 16:27 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-28 20:28 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-24 7:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/7] BBDEV test updates David Marchand
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=f8f2ef64-b595-e27b-293f-0fa2403d87e7@redhat.com \
--to=trix@redhat.com \
--cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=nicolas.chautru@intel.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.