Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd
Thanks Darrell. On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> wrote: > > > > > *From: *Hui Xiang <xiangh...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 11:35 PM > *To: *Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> > *Cc: *"ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org" <ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org> > *Subject: *Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing > cycles for pmd > > > > I see, it is exactly what you said, thanks. > > > > So to analyze or enhance performance, the value of "avg processing cycles > per packet" should be looked to evaluate ovs-dpdk, which gives the result > of processsing cycles per packet for a specified pmd, right? > > > > For a given pipeline of matching and actions: > > That is one parameter that can be used > > Total throughput for a given packet size as measured externally is another. > > > > > > > > > > > ___ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd
I see, it is exactly what you said, thanks. So to analyze or enhance performance, the value of "avg processing cycles per packet" should be looked to evaluate ovs-dpdk, which gives the result of processsing cycles per packet for a specified pmd, right? ___ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd
From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> Date: Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 10:55 AM To: Hui Xiang <xiangh...@gmail.com>, "ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org" <ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of Hui Xiang <xiangh...@gmail.com> Date: Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 9:06 PM To: "ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org" <ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org> Subject: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd Hi guys, I got below results on my environment, but confusing with the cycles percents, it looks like the polling plus processing cycles per pmd is 100%, but as I recalled there are some improvment document that showed their processing cycles are 100% percents which means 0 for polling cycles? how should be the rate of polling and processing cycles take? should it be better for less polling and much processing for performance's benefits? “polling” is checking for packets, but there are none to process. Above will be the definition when https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/729970/ is pushed. In the software that you are using, “polling” is the time spent polling when there are no packets and also polling/receiving/batching packets. Using this definition, polling percentage will not go below “some value”, since even if all polling cycles receive packets that time spent polling/receiving/batching is counted as “polling”. input more packets -> higher “processing” percentage. pmd thread numa_id 1 core_id 27: emc hits:141332792126 megaflow hits:263 avg. subtable lookups per hit:1.00 miss:59 lost:0 polling cycles:19832152639760 (12.60%) processing cycles:137517517407771 (87.40%) avg cycles per packet: 1113.33 (157349670047531/141332792711) avg processing cycles per packet: 973.01 (137517517407771/141332792711) Thanks a lot. BR. ___ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
Re: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd
From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of Hui Xiang <xiangh...@gmail.com> Date: Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 9:06 PM To: "ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org" <ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org> Subject: [ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd Hi guys, I got below results on my environment, but confusing with the cycles percents, it looks like the polling plus processing cycles per pmd is 100%, but as I recalled there are some improvment document that showed their processing cycles are 100% percents which means 0 for polling cycles? how should be the rate of polling and processing cycles take? should it be better for less polling and much processing for performance's benefits? “polling” is checking for packets, but there are none to process. input more packets -> higher “processing” percentage. pmd thread numa_id 1 core_id 27: emc hits:141332792126 megaflow hits:263 avg. subtable lookups per hit:1.00 miss:59 lost:0 polling cycles:19832152639760 (12.60%) processing cycles:137517517407771 (87.40%) avg cycles per packet: 1113.33 (157349670047531/141332792711) avg processing cycles per packet: 973.01 (137517517407771/141332792711) Thanks a lot. BR. ___ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
[ovs-discuss] OVS-DPDK polling cycles and processing cycles for pmd
Hi guys, I got below results on my environment, but confusing with the cycles percents, it looks like the polling plus processing cycles per pmd is 100%, but as I recalled there are some improvment document that showed their processing cycles are 100% percents which means 0 for polling cycles? how should be the rate of polling and processing cycles take? should it be better for less polling and much processing for performance's benefits? pmd thread numa_id 1 core_id 27: emc hits:141332792126 megaflow hits:263 avg. subtable lookups per hit:1.00 miss:59 lost:0 polling cycles:19832152639760 (12.60%) processing cycles:137517517407771 (87.40%) avg cycles per packet: 1113.33 (157349670047531/141332792711) avg processing cycles per packet: 973.01 (137517517407771/141332792711) Thanks a lot. BR. ___ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
