On 22-Feb-19 11:45 AM, David Hunt wrote:
The distributor application is bottlenecked by the distributor core,
so if we can give more frequency to this core, then the overall
performance of the application may increase.
This patch uses the rte_power_get_capabilities() API to query the cores
provided in the core mask, and if any high frequency cores are found
(e.g. Turbo Boost is enabled), we will pin the distributor workload to
that core.
Signed-off-by: Liang Ma <liang.j...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hunt <david.h...@intel.com>
---
examples/distributor/main.c | 185 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
examples/distributor/meson.build | 2 +-
2 files changed, 149 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
diff --git a/examples/distributor/main.c b/examples/distributor/main.c
index 03a05e3d9..0541c50b0 100644
--- a/examples/distributor/main.c
+++ b/examples/distributor/main.c
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include <rte_prefetch.h>
#include <rte_distributor.h>
#include <rte_pause.h>
+#include <rte_power.h>
#define RX_RING_SIZE 1024
#define TX_RING_SIZE 1024
@@ -281,6 +282,7 @@ lcore_rx(struct lcore_params *p)
if (++port == nb_ports)
port = 0;
}
+ rte_power_exit(rte_lcore_id());
why is this being added? it doesn't seem relevant to neither the commit
message nor the feature. if this was missing before, please add it in a
separate patch. same applies to all other instances where
rte_power_exit() is added.
also, your app seems to support power and non-power operation. what
happens when rte_power_exit is called on an lcore that's not been
initialized (i.e. the fallback to non-power mode)? does this (and other
rte_power_exit() instances) code only get called when in power mode?
/* set worker & tx threads quit flag */
printf("\nCore %u exiting rx task.\n", rte_lcore_id());
quit_signal = 1;
@@ -364,6 +366,8 @@ lcore_distributor(struct lcore_params *p)
printf("\nCore %u exiting distributor task.\n", rte_lcore_id());
quit_signal_work = 1;
+ rte_power_exit(rte_lcore_id());
+
rte_distributor_flush(d);
/* Unblock any returns so workers can exit */
rte_distributor_clear_returns(d);
@@ -435,6 +439,7 @@ lcore_tx(struct rte_ring *in_r)
}
}
}
+ rte_power_exit(rte_lcore_id());
printf("\nCore %u exiting tx task.\n", rte_lcore_id());
return 0;
}
@@ -575,9 +580,32 @@ lcore_worker(struct lcore_params *p)
if (num > 0)
app_stats.worker_bursts[p->worker_id][num-1]++;
}
+ rte_power_exit(rte_lcore_id());
return 0;
}
+static int
+init_power_library(void)
+{
+ int ret = 0, lcore_id;
+ for (lcore_id = 0; lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE; lcore_id++) {
RTE_LCORE_FOREACH?
+ if (rte_lcore_is_enabled(lcore_id)) {
+ /* init power management library */
+ ret = rte_power_init(lcore_id);
+ if (ret)
+ RTE_LOG(ERR, POWER,
+ "Library initialization failed on core %u\n",
+ lcore_id);
+ /*
+ * Return on first failure, we'll fall back
+ * to non-power operation
+ */
+ return ret;
You'll probably want to fix indentation here, it's misleading.
+ }
+ }
+ return ret;
+}
+
/* display usage */
static void
print_usage(const char *prgname)
<...>
+ * Here we'll pre-assign lcore ids to the rx, tx and
+ * distributor workloads if there's higher frequency
+ * on those cores e.g. if Turbo Boost is enabled.
+ * It's also worth mentioning that it will assign cores in a
+ * specific order, so that if there's less than three
+ * available, the higher frequency cores will go to the
+ * distributor first, then rx, then tx.
+ */
+ RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_SLAVE(lcore_id) {
+
+ rte_power_get_capabilities(lcore_id, &lcore_cap);
+
+ if (lcore_cap.turbo == 1) {
+ priority_num++;
+ switch (priority_num) {
+ case 1:
+ distr_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Distributor on priority core
%d\n",
This says "priority", other instances say "preferred". Which is it? :)
+ lcore_id);
+ break;
+ case 2:
+ rx_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Rx on preferred core %d\n",
+ lcore_id);
+ break;
+ case 3:
+ tx_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Tx on preferred core %d\n",
+ lcore_id);
+ break;
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * If there's any of the key workloads left without an lcore_id
Double space after "there's".
+ * after the higer frequency core assignment above, pre-assign
+ * them here.
+ */
RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_SLAVE(lcore_id) {
- if (worker_id == rte_lcore_count() - 3) {
- printf("Starting distributor on lcore_id %d\n",
- lcore_id);
- /* distributor core */
- struct lcore_params *p =
- rte_malloc(NULL, sizeof(*p), 0);
- if (!p)
- rte_panic("malloc failure\n");
- *p = (struct lcore_params){worker_id, d,
- rx_dist_ring, dist_tx_ring, mbuf_pool};
- rte_eal_remote_launch(
- (lcore_function_t *)lcore_distributor,
- p, lcore_id);
- } else if (worker_id == rte_lcore_count() - 4) {
- printf("Starting tx on worker_id %d, lcore_id %d\n",
- worker_id, lcore_id);
- /* tx core */
- rte_eal_remote_launch((lcore_function_t *)lcore_tx,
- dist_tx_ring, lcore_id);
- } else if (worker_id == rte_lcore_count() - 2) {
- printf("Starting rx on worker_id %d, lcore_id %d\n",
- worker_id, lcore_id);
- /* rx core */
- struct lcore_params *p =
- rte_malloc(NULL, sizeof(*p), 0);
- if (!p)
- rte_panic("malloc failure\n");
- *p = (struct lcore_params){worker_id, d, rx_dist_ring,
- dist_tx_ring, mbuf_pool};
- rte_eal_remote_launch((lcore_function_t *)lcore_rx,
- p, lcore_id);
+
+ if (distr_core_id == 0) {
0 is a valid core id. You would probably want to use -1 here.
+ distr_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Distributor on core %d\n", lcore_id);
+ }
+ if ((rx_core_id == 0) &&
+ (lcore_id != distr_core_id)) {
You could just check if (lcore_id == distr_core_id || lcore_id ==
rx_core_id || lcore_id == tx_core_id) and skip the iteration entirely,
rather than checking at every step.
+ rx_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Rx on core %d\n", lcore_id);
+ }
+ if ((tx_core_id == 0) &&
+ (lcore_id != distr_core_id) &&
+ (lcore_id != rx_core_id)) {
+ tx_core_id = lcore_id;
+ printf("Tx on core %d\n", lcore_id);
+ }
+ counter++;
+ }
+
+ printf(" tx id %d, dist id %d, rx id %d\n",
+ tx_core_id,
+ distr_core_id,
+ rx_core_id);
+
+ /*
+ * Kick off all the worker threads first, avoiding the pre-assigned
+ * lcore_ids for tx, rx and distributor workloads.
+ */
+ RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_SLAVE(lcore_id) {
+
+ if ((lcore_id == distr_core_id) ||
+ (lcore_id == rx_core_id) ||
+ (lcore_id == tx_core_id)) {
+
} else {
This is a very unorthodox way of skipping an iteration :)
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
