[dpdk-users] i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue

Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) Gavin.Hu at arm.com
Fri Jul 26 12:00:33 CEST 2019


Hi Qi,

Thanks for your explanation!
I did some testing and found the barriers caused a big drop in RFC2544 NDR performance on aarch64, how about it on X86?
Is it possible to count DD bits in a way of surviving across the out-of-order descriptors reading?

Best Regards,
Gavin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 8:11 PM
> To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <Gavin.Hu at arm.com>; Richardson,
> Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> Cc: users at dpdk.org; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China)
> <Phil.Yang at arm.com>
> Subject: RE: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue
>
> Hi Gavin:
>
> in vPMD, we read 4 or 8 packets as batch, we count DD bits for packet
> received, but not check the if they are continues or not, we assume it should
> always be 1000, 1100, 1110, 1111 ....(take batch size is 4 as example)
> while the out of order read instruction generated by compiler will
> cause driver to get un-continues DD bits, like 1011, the descriptor on the hole
> actually is invalid since when it is read , descriptor is not write back yet, but we
> still process this as 1110, it cause an corrupted mbuf returned.
>
> hope this is helpful.
>
> Regards
> Qi
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) [mailto:Gavin.Hu at arm.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 5:57 PM
> > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> > <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> > Cc: users at dpdk.org; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > <Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China)
> > <Phil.Yang at arm.com>
> > Subject: i40e vPMD fix out of order Rx read issue
> >
> > Hi Qi,
> >
> > I am working on optimizing the i40e vPMD on aarch64 and I see this patch
> > relevant.
> > Could you illuminate what issue this patch was fixing?
> > I understand the PMD works at the driver layer, for delivery of L2 packets.
> > It does not own the responsibility to keep order(the responsibility lies with
> the
> > protocol stack, like TCP)?
> >
> > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/16665/
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Gavin
> >
> > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
> > please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any
> > other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any
> > medium. Thank you.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.


More information about the users mailing list