From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Cc: andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, bruce.richardson@intel.com,
jerinjacobk@gmail.com, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 16:38:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ye7IEJGmdAclYMeZ@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220114163650.94288-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Hi Morten,
Few comments below.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 05:36:50PM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> A flush threshold for the mempool cache was introduced in DPDK version
> 1.3, but rte_mempool_do_generic_get() was not completely updated back
> then, and some inefficiencies were introduced.
>
> This patch fixes the following in rte_mempool_do_generic_get():
>
> 1. The code that initially screens the cache request was not updated
> with the change in DPDK version 1.3.
> The initial screening compared the request length to the cache size,
> which was correct before, but became irrelevant with the introduction of
> the flush threshold. E.g. the cache can hold up to flushthresh objects,
> which is more than its size, so some requests were not served from the
> cache, even though they could be.
> The initial screening has now been corrected to match the initial
> screening in rte_mempool_do_generic_put(), which verifies that a cache
> is present, and that the length of the request does not overflow the
> memory allocated for the cache.
>
> 2. The function is a helper for rte_mempool_generic_get(), so it must
> behave according to the description of that function.
> Specifically, objects must first be returned from the cache,
> subsequently from the ring.
> After the change in DPDK version 1.3, this was not the behavior when
> the request was partially satisfied from the cache; instead, the objects
> from the ring were returned ahead of the objects from the cache. This is
> bad for CPUs with a small L1 cache, which benefit from having the hot
> objects first in the returned array. (This is also the reason why
> the function returns the objects in reverse order.)
> Now, all code paths first return objects from the cache, subsequently
> from the ring.
>
> 3. If the cache could not be backfilled, the function would attempt
> to get all the requested objects from the ring (instead of only the
> number of requested objects minus the objects available in the ring),
> and the function would fail if that failed.
> Now, the first part of the request is always satisfied from the cache,
> and if the subsequent backfilling of the cache from the ring fails, only
> the remaining requested objects are retrieved from the ring.
This is the only point I'd consider to be a fix. The problem, from the
user perspective, is that a get() can fail despite there are enough
objects in cache + common pool.
To be honnest, I feel a bit uncomfortable to have such a list of
problems solved in one commit, even if I understand that they are part
of the same code rework.
Ideally, this fix should be a separate commit. What do you think of
having this simple patch for this fix, and then do the
optimizations/rework in another commit?
--- a/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -1484,7 +1484,22 @@ rte_mempool_do_generic_get(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table,
* the ring directly. If that fails, we are truly out of
* buffers.
*/
- goto ring_dequeue;
+ req = n - cache->len;
+ ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, obj_table, req);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_bulk, 1);
+ RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_objs, n);
+ return ret;
+ }
+ obj_table += req;
+ len = cache->len;
+ while (len > 0)
+ *obj_table++ = cache_objs[--len];
+ cache->len = 0;
+ RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
+ RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
+
+ return 0;
}
cache->len += req;
The title of this commit could then be more precise to describe
the solved issue.
> 4. The code flow for satisfying the request from the cache was slightly
> inefficient:
> The likely code path where the objects are simply served from the cache
> was treated as unlikely. Now it is treated as likely.
> And in the code path where the cache was backfilled first, numbers were
> added and subtracted from the cache length; now this code path simply
> sets the cache length to its final value.
>
> 5. Some comments were not correct anymore.
> The comments have been updated.
> Most importanly, the description of the succesful return value was
> inaccurate. Success only returns 0, not >= 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> ---
> lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> index 1e7a3c1527..88f1b8b7ab 100644
> --- a/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> +++ b/lib/mempool/rte_mempool.h
> @@ -1443,6 +1443,10 @@ rte_mempool_put(struct rte_mempool *mp, void *obj)
>
> /**
> * @internal Get several objects from the mempool; used internally.
> + *
> + * If cache is enabled, objects are returned from the cache in Last In First
> + * Out (LIFO) order for the benefit of CPUs with small L1 cache.
> + *
> * @param mp
> * A pointer to the mempool structure.
> * @param obj_table
> @@ -1452,7 +1456,7 @@ rte_mempool_put(struct rte_mempool *mp, void *obj)
> * @param cache
> * A pointer to a mempool cache structure. May be NULL if not needed.
> * @return
> - * - >=0: Success; number of objects supplied.
> + * - 0: Success; got n objects.
> * - <0: Error; code of ring dequeue function.
> */
> static __rte_always_inline int
I think that part should be in a separate commit too. This is a
documentation fix, which is easily backportable (and should be
backported) (Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")).
> @@ -1463,38 +1467,71 @@ rte_mempool_do_generic_get(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table,
> uint32_t index, len;
> void **cache_objs;
>
> - /* No cache provided or cannot be satisfied from cache */
> - if (unlikely(cache == NULL || n >= cache->size))
> + /* No cache provided or if get would overflow mem allocated for cache */
> + if (unlikely(cache == NULL || n > RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_MAX_SIZE))
> goto ring_dequeue;
>
> - cache_objs = cache->objs;
> + cache_objs = &cache->objs[cache->len];
> +
> + if (n <= cache->len) {
> + /* The entire request can be satisfied from the cache. */
> + cache->len -= n;
> + for (index = 0; index < n; index++)
> + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
>
> - /* Can this be satisfied from the cache? */
> - if (cache->len < n) {
> - /* No. Backfill the cache first, and then fill from it */
> - uint32_t req = n + (cache->size - cache->len);
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
>
> - /* How many do we require i.e. number to fill the cache + the request */
> - ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp,
> - &cache->objs[cache->len], req);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /* Satisfy the first part of the request by depleting the cache. */
> + len = cache->len;
> + for (index = 0; index < len; index++)
> + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
> +
> + /* Number of objects remaining to satisfy the request. */
> + len = n - len;
> +
> + /* Fill the cache from the ring; fetch size + remaining objects. */
> + ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, cache->objs,
> + cache->size + len);
> + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> + /*
> + * We are buffer constrained, and not able to allocate
> + * cache + remaining.
> + * Do not fill the cache, just satisfy the remaining part of
> + * the request directly from the ring.
> + */
> + ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, obj_table, len);
> if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> /*
> - * In the off chance that we are buffer constrained,
> - * where we are not able to allocate cache + n, go to
> - * the ring directly. If that fails, we are truly out of
> - * buffers.
> + * That also failed.
> + * No furter action is required to roll the first
> + * part of the request back into the cache, as both
> + * cache->len and the objects in the cache are intact.
> */
> - goto ring_dequeue;
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_bulk, 1);
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_fail_objs, n);
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> - cache->len += req;
> + /* Commit that the cache was emptied. */
> + cache->len = 0;
> +
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> + RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
> - /* Now fill in the response ... */
> - for (index = 0, len = cache->len - 1; index < n; ++index, len--, obj_table++)
> - *obj_table = cache_objs[len];
> + cache_objs = &cache->objs[cache->size + len];
>
> - cache->len -= n;
> + /* Satisfy the remaining part of the request from the filled cache. */
> + cache->len = cache->size;
> + for (index = 0; index < len; index++)
> + *obj_table++ = *--cache_objs;
>
> RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_bulk, 1);
> RTE_MEMPOOL_STAT_ADD(mp, get_success_objs, n);
> @@ -1503,7 +1540,7 @@ rte_mempool_do_generic_get(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table,
>
> ring_dequeue:
>
> - /* get remaining objects from ring */
> + /* Get the objects from the ring. */
> ret = rte_mempool_ops_dequeue_bulk(mp, obj_table, n);
>
> if (ret < 0) {
About the code itself, it is more readable now, and probably more
efficient. Did you notice any performance change in mempool perf
autotests ?
Thanks,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-24 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-26 15:34 [RFC] mempool: rte_mempool_do_generic_get optimizations Morten Brørup
2022-01-06 12:23 ` [PATCH] mempool: optimize incomplete cache handling Morten Brørup
2022-01-06 16:55 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-01-07 8:46 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-10 7:26 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-01-10 10:55 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-14 16:36 ` [PATCH] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Morten Brørup
2022-01-17 17:35 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-01-18 8:25 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-18 9:07 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-01-24 15:38 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2022-01-24 16:11 ` Olivier Matz
2022-01-28 10:22 ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-17 11:52 ` [PATCH] mempool: optimize put objects to " Morten Brørup
2022-01-19 14:52 ` [PATCH v2] mempool: fix " Morten Brørup
2022-01-19 15:03 ` [PATCH v3] " Morten Brørup
2022-01-24 15:39 ` Olivier Matz
2022-01-28 9:37 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-02 8:14 ` [PATCH v2] mempool: fix get objects from " Morten Brørup
2022-06-15 21:18 ` Morten Brørup
2022-09-29 10:52 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 12:57 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 15:13 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 15:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 18:09 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-06 13:43 ` Aaron Conole
2022-10-04 16:03 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 16:36 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 16:39 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-02 10:33 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 9:04 ` Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 9:14 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 9:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-04-07 10:32 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 10:43 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-04-07 11:36 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-04 20:01 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 11:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 11:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] mempool: avoid usage of term ring on put Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:08 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 13:14 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 13:19 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 12:53 ` [PATCH v3] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-04 14:42 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-07 10:44 ` [PATCH v4] " Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-08 20:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-11 20:30 ` Copy-pasted code should be updated Morten Brørup
2022-10-11 21:47 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2022-10-30 8:44 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 22:50 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2022-10-14 14:01 ` [PATCH v4] mempool: fix get objects from mempool with cache Olivier Matz
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 0/4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] mempool: check driver enqueue result in one place Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] mempool: avoid usage of term ring on put Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] mempool: fix cache flushing algorithm Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 14:31 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-09 14:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 15:08 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 14:01 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-14 15:57 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 19:50 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-15 6:57 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-18 16:32 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-10-09 13:37 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] mempool: flush cache completely on overflow Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-09 14:44 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-14 14:01 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-10 15:21 ` [PATCH v6 0/4] mempool: fix mempool cache flushing algorithm Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-11 19:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 14:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-26 14:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 14:44 ` [PATCH] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Morten Brørup
2022-10-26 19:44 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-10-27 8:34 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-27 9:22 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-27 11:42 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-27 12:11 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-27 15:20 ` Olivier Matz
2022-10-28 6:35 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] " Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:35 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] mempool: optimized debug statistics Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:41 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Morten Brørup
2022-10-28 6:41 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] mempool: optimized debug statistics Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 9:09 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-30 9:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-30 9:17 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mempool: cache align mempool cache objects Thomas Monjalon
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=Ye7IEJGmdAclYMeZ@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.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.