From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "'Singh, Jasvinder'" <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
Cc: "'Dumitrescu, Cristian'" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>,
"'alangordondewar@gmail.com'" <alangordondewar@gmail.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, 'Alan Dewar' <alan.dewar@att.com>,
"Dewar, Alan" <alan.dewar@intl.att.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] sched: fix port time rounding error
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 00:50:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2265604.5qLSFAYZse@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <80847da6f3b44c49a3884da76818302e@intl.att.com>
Jasvinder, what is the conclusion of this patch?
21/04/2020 10:21, Dewar, Alan:
> From: Singh, Jasvinder <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
> > > > From: Alan Dewar <alan.dewar@att.com>
> > > >
> > > > The QoS scheduler works off port time that is computed from the
> > > > number of CPU cycles that have elapsed since the last time the port was
> > > > polled. It divides the number of elapsed cycles to calculate how
> > > > many bytes can be sent, however this division can generate rounding
> > > > errors, where some fraction of a byte sent may be lost.
> > > >
> > > > Lose enough of these fractional bytes and the QoS scheduler
> > > > underperforms. The problem is worse with low bandwidths.
> > > >
> > > > To compensate for this rounding error this fix doesn't advance the
> > > > port's time_cpu_cycles by the number of cycles that have elapsed,
> > > > but by multiplying the computed number of bytes that can be sent
> > > > (which has been rounded down) by number of cycles per byte.
> > > > This will mean that port's time_cpu_cycles will lag behind the CPU
> > > > cycles momentarily. At the next poll, the lag will be taken into
> > > > account.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: de3cfa2c98 ("sched: initial import")
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Dewar <alan.dewar@att.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c
> > > > b/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c index c0983ddda..c656dba2d 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c
> > > > @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ struct rte_sched_port {
> > > > uint64_t time_cpu_bytes; /* Current CPU time measured in bytes
> > > > */
> > > > uint64_t time; /* Current NIC TX time measured in bytes */
> > > > struct rte_reciprocal inv_cycles_per_byte; /* CPU cycles per byte
> > > > */
> > > > + uint64_t cycles_per_byte;
> > > >
> > > > /* Grinders */
> > > > struct rte_mbuf **pkts_out;
> > > > @@ -852,6 +853,7 @@ rte_sched_port_config(struct
> > > rte_sched_port_params
> > > > *params)
> > > > cycles_per_byte = (rte_get_tsc_hz() << RTE_SCHED_TIME_SHIFT)
> > > > / params->rate;
> > > > port->inv_cycles_per_byte = rte_reciprocal_value(cycles_per_byte);
> > > > + port->cycles_per_byte = cycles_per_byte;
> > > >
> > > > /* Grinders */
> > > > port->pkts_out = NULL;
> > > > @@ -2673,20 +2675,26 @@ static inline void
> > > > rte_sched_port_time_resync(struct rte_sched_port *port) {
> > > > uint64_t cycles = rte_get_tsc_cycles();
> > > > - uint64_t cycles_diff = cycles - port->time_cpu_cycles;
> > > > + uint64_t cycles_diff;
> > > > uint64_t bytes_diff;
> > > > uint32_t i;
> > > >
> > > > + if (cycles < port->time_cpu_cycles)
> > > > + goto end;
> >
> > Above check seems redundant as port->time_cpu_cycles will always be less than the current cycles due to roundoff in previous iteration.
> >
>
> This was to catch the condition where the cycles wraps back to zero (after 100+ years?? depending on clock speed).
> Rather than just going to end: the conditional should at least reset port->time_cpu_cycles back to zero.
> So there would be a very temporary glitch in accuracy once every 100+ years.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-24 22:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-16 8:48 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] sched: fix port time rounding error alangordondewar
2020-04-17 21:19 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-20 11:23 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-04-21 8:21 ` Dewar, Alan
2020-06-24 22:50 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2020-06-25 8:32 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-06-25 8:40 ` Alan Dewar
2020-06-25 9:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " alangordondewar
2020-07-05 20:41 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-06 21:20 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-07-06 23:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-20 14:32 ` Kevin Traynor
2020-08-21 15:28 ` Kinsella, Ray
2020-09-07 10:09 ` Kevin Traynor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2265604.5qLSFAYZse@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=alan.dewar@att.com \
--cc=alan.dewar@intl.att.com \
--cc=alangordondewar@gmail.com \
--cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jasvinder.singh@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.