[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: update tx_free_threshold to improve zero copy performance

Ananyev, Konstantin konstantin.ananyev at intel.com
Thu Apr 12 15:56:25 CEST 2018



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 2:12 PM
> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; Chen, Junjie J <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>;
> dev at dpdk.org; Chen at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: update tx_free_threshold to improve zero copy performance
> 
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:20:07PM +0000, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
> > Hi Junjie:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 7:52 PM
> > > To: Chen, Junjie J <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei
> > > <beilei.xing at intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Chen, Junjie J <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>; Chen at dpdk.org
> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: update tx_free_threshold to
> > > improve zero copy performance
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Junjie Chen
> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 6:32 AM
> > > > To: Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z
> > > > <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
> > > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Chen, Junjie J <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>;
> > > > Chen at dpdk.org
> > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: update tx_free_threshold to
> > > > improve zero copy performance
> > > >
> > > > From: "Chen, Junjie" <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>
> > > >
> > > > When vhost backend works in dequeue zero copy mode, nic locks virtio's
> > > > buffer until there is less or equal than tx_free_threshold buffer
> > > > remain and then free number of tx burst buffer. This causes packets
> > > > drop in virtio side and impacts zero copy performance. So we need to
> > > > increase the tx_free_threshold to let nic free virtio's buffer as soon as
> > > possible.
> > > > Also we keep the upper limit to tx max burst size to ensure least
> > > > performance impact on non zero copy.
> > >
> > > Ok but why vhost app can't just use tx_queue_setup() to specify desired value
> > > for tx_free_thresh?
> > > Why instead we have to modify PMD to satisfy needs of one app?
> > > Konstantin
> >
> > I think the commit log could include the explanation that this change is proved not impact
> > driver's performance and it reduce total memory be locked by PMD Tx, so basically it benefit
> > application that share the same mem pool overall, vhost dequeue zero copy is one of the example.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chen, Junjie <junjie.j.chen at intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c
> > > > b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c index 56a854cec..d9569bdc9 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c
> > > > @@ -2039,6 +2039,8 @@ i40e_dev_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev
> > > *dev,
> > > >  		tx_conf->tx_rs_thresh : DEFAULT_TX_RS_THRESH);
> > > >  	tx_free_thresh = (uint16_t)((tx_conf->tx_free_thresh) ?
> > > >  		tx_conf->tx_free_thresh : DEFAULT_TX_FREE_THRESH);
> > > > +	if (tx_free_thresh < nb_desc - I40E_TX_MAX_BURST)
> > > > +		tx_free_thresh = nb_desc - I40E_TX_MAX_BURST;
> >
> > I think we'd better still allow application to set tx_free_thresh, since a small tx_free_thresh may still have benefit to let driver handle the
> first strike after device restarted
> > So, nb_desc - I40E_TX_MAX_BURST can only be set when tx_conf->tx_rs_thresh = 0
> >
> > Regards
> > Qi
> >
> +1 for just changing in this case.
> 
Basically you suggest to change DEFAULT_TX_FREE_THRESH.
Are you sure that it wouldn't impact any application on any platform (IA, arm, etc.)?
As I remember we already had similar conversation few years ago.
Again if memory serves me right - one of the contr-arguments about setting that value too high
was that PMD might start to check DD bit inside TXD too often - and will collide with HW updating it more often.
As I remember it was suggested to use 1/2 or 3/4 of nb_desc as default one.
Though I still don't see what is wrong with setting tx_free_thresh vi queue_setup() for that particular case.
In that case we can be sure that no other stuff will be affected.
After all - that's why it is configurable.
Konstantin



More information about the dev mailing list