> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:13:22PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > >> Tunnel metadata can be substantially larger than our existing fields > >> (up to 124 bytes in a single Geneve option) so this extends the size > >> of the data that we can handle with metaflow fields. This also > >> breaks a few tests that assume that their max size is also the > >> maximum that can be handled in a field. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> > > > > Did you look around at all to see whether this will unreasonably blow up > > any data or algorithms? > > I don't believe that it should have any significant effects. > Generally, code does operations on the fields based on mf->n_bytes > (with the exception of some memset()s here and there). I don't think > that we really store these in a large number for any real period of > time.
With this series of patches, in particular patch 10/11 "tunnel: Geneve TLV handling support for OpenFlow" I've measured a significant decrease in performance with the dpdkport type. For example, with a loopback test with 64Byte packets I've seen a 25% decrease in throughput. I suspect this is in relation to the size of the new tun_metadata struct. A quick perf analysis and I see we're spending significantly more time initialising packet metadata in the dp_netdev_process_rxq_port function. Are there any plans to address this performance degradation? Thanks, Ciara _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev