Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:28:09PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2016 23:52:47 +0300
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300
> > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > Add ringtest based unit test for skb array.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  tools/virtio/ringtest/skb_array.c | 167 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  tools/virtio/ringtest/Makefile    |   4 +-  
> > > 
> > > Patch didn't apply cleanly to Makefile, as you also seems to have
> > > "virtio_ring_inorder", I manually applied it.
> > > 
> > > I chdir to tools/virtio/ringtest/ and I could compile "skb_array",
> > > BUT how do I use it??? (the README is not helpful)
> > > 
> > > What is the "output", are there any performance measurement results?  
> > 
> > First, if it completes successfully this means it completed
> > a ton of cycles without errors. It caches any missing barriers
> > which aren't nops on your system.
> 
> I applied these patches on net-next (at commit 07b75260e) and the
> skb_array test program never terminates.   Strangely if I use your git
> tree[1] (on branch vhost) the program does terminate... I didn't spot
> the difference.
>  
> > Second - use perf.
> 
> I do like perf, but it does not answer my questions about the
> performance of this queue. I will code something up in my own
> framework[2] to answer my own performance questions.
> 
> Like what is be minimum overhead (in cycles) achievable with this type
> of queue, in the most optimal situation (e.g. same CPU enq+deq cache hot)
> for fastpath usage.

Actually there is, kind of, a way to find out with my tool
if you have an HT CPU.  When you do run-on-all.sh
it will pin consumer to the last CPU, then run producer
on all of them. Look for the number for the HT pair -
this shares cache between producer and consumer.

This is not the same as doing produce + consume on
the same CPU but it's close enough I think.

To measure overhead I guess I should build a NOP tool
that does not actually produce or consume anything.
Will do.

> Then I also want to know how this performs when two CPUs are involved.
> As this is also a primary use-case, for you when sending packets into a
> guest.
> 
> 
> > E.g. simple perf stat will measure how long does it take to execute.
> > there's a script that runs it on different CPUs,
> > so I normally do:
> >
> > sh run-on-all.sh perf stat -r 5 ./skb_array
> 
> I recommend documenting this in the README file in the same dir ;-)
> 
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mst/vhost.git/log/?h=vhost
> [2] https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel
> -- 
> Best regards,
>   Jesper Dangaard Brouer
>   MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
>   Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
>   LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer