On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 02:11:22PM +0000, Eads, Gage wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) [mailto:gavin...@arm.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 2:06 AM
> > To: Eads, Gage <gage.e...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: olivier.m...@6wind.com; arybche...@solarflare.com; Richardson, Bruce
> > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
> > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; Phil Yang (Arm Technology China)
> > <phil.y...@arm.com>
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] mempool/nb_stack: add non-blocking
> > stack mempool
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Gage Eads
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 6:33 AM
> > > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > > Cc: olivier.m...@6wind.com; arybche...@solarflare.com;
> > > bruce.richard...@intel.com; konstantin.anan...@intel.com
> > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] mempool/nb_stack: add non-blocking
> > > stack mempool
> > >
> > > This commit adds support for non-blocking (linked list based) stack
> > > mempool handler. The stack uses a 128-bit compare-and-swap
> > > instruction, and thus is limited to x86_64. The 128-bit CAS atomically
> > > updates the stack top pointer and a modification counter, which
> > > protects against the ABA problem.
> > >
> > > In mempool_perf_autotest the lock-based stack outperforms the non-
> > > blocking handler*, however:
> > > - For applications with preemptible pthreads, a lock-based stack's
> > > worst-case performance (i.e. one thread being preempted while
> > > holding the spinlock) is much worse than the non-blocking stack's.
> > > - Using per-thread mempool caches will largely mitigate the performance
> > > difference.
> > >
> > > *Test setup: x86_64 build with default config, dual-socket Xeon
> > > E5-2699 v4, running on isolcpus cores with a tickless scheduler. The
> > > lock-based stack's rate_persec was 1x-3.5x the non-blocking stack's.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > MAINTAINERS | 4 +
> > > config/common_base | 1 +
> > > doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst | 5 +
> > > drivers/mempool/Makefile | 3 +
> > > drivers/mempool/meson.build | 5 +
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/Makefile | 23 ++++
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/meson.build | 4 +
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/nb_lifo.h | 147
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/rte_mempool_nb_stack.c | 125
> > > ++++++++++++++++++
> > > .../nb_stack/rte_mempool_nb_stack_version.map | 4 +
> > > mk/rte.app.mk | 7 +-
> > > 11 files changed, 326 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode
> > > 100644 drivers/mempool/nb_stack/Makefile create mode 100644
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/meson.build
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/mempool/nb_stack/nb_lifo.h
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/mempool/nb_stack/rte_mempool_nb_stack.c
> > > create mode 100644
> > > drivers/mempool/nb_stack/rte_mempool_nb_stack_version.map
> > >
> > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 470f36b9c..5519d3323
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > > @@ -416,6 +416,10 @@ M: Artem V. Andreev <artem.andr...@oktetlabs.ru>
> > > M: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>
> > > F: drivers/mempool/bucket/
> > >
> > > +Non-blocking stack memory pool
> > > +M: Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com>
> > > +F: drivers/mempool/nb_stack/
> > > +
> > >
> > > Bus Drivers
> > > -----------
> > > diff --git a/config/common_base b/config/common_base index
> > > 964a6956e..8a51f36b1 100644
> > > --- a/config/common_base
> > > +++ b/config/common_base
> > > @@ -726,6 +726,7 @@ CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_DEBUG=n #
> > > CONFIG_RTE_DRIVER_MEMPOOL_BUCKET=y
> > > CONFIG_RTE_DRIVER_MEMPOOL_BUCKET_SIZE_KB=64
> > > +CONFIG_RTE_DRIVER_MEMPOOL_NB_STACK=y
> >
> > NAK, as this applies to x86_64 only, it will break arm/ppc and even 32bit
> > i386
> > configurations.
> >
>
> Hi Gavin,
>
> This patch resolves that in the make and meson build files, which ensure that
> the library is only built for x86-64 targets:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mempool/Makefile b/drivers/mempool/Makefile
> index 28c2e8360..895cf8a34 100644
> --- a/drivers/mempool/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/mempool/Makefile
> @@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ endif
> ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_EAL_VFIO)$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_FSLMC_BUS),yy)
> DIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_DPAA2_MEMPOOL) += dpaa2
> endif
> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_X86_64),y)
> +DIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_DRIVER_MEMPOOL_NB_STACK) += nb_stack
> +endif
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mempool/nb_stack/meson.build
> b/drivers/mempool/nb_stack/meson.build
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..4a699511d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/mempool/nb_stack/meson.build
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> +# Copyright(c) 2019 Intel Corporation
> +
> +if arch_subdir != 'x86' or cc.sizeof('void *') == 4
> + build = false
> +endif
> +
Minor suggestion:
Can be simplified to "build = dpdk_conf.has('RTE_ARCH_X86_64')", I believe.
/Bruce
