[ovs-dev] [PATCH v4] dpif-netdev: Change definitions of 'idle' & 'processing' cycles

Stokes, Ian ian.stokes at intel.com
Fri May 26 14:13:43 UTC 2017


> Instead of counting all polling cycles as processing cycles, only count
> the cycles where packets were received from the polling.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Georg Schmuecking <georg.schmuecking at ericsson.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ciara Loftus <ciara.loftus at intel.com>
> Co-authored-by: Georg Schmuecking <georg.schmuecking at ericsson.com>
> Acked-by: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor at redhat.com>
> ---
> v4:
> - Move call to cycles_count_intermediate in order to collect more
>   accurate statistics.
> v3:
> - Updated acks & co-author tags
> - Removed unnecessary PMD_CYCLES_POLLING counter type
> - Explain terms 'idle' and 'processing' cycles in
>   vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in
> v2:
> - Rebase
> 
>  lib/dpif-netdev.c          | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> -----
>  vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in |  5 +++-
>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/dpif-netdev.c b/lib/dpif-netdev.c index 30907b7..a80ffb2
> 100644
> --- a/lib/dpif-netdev.c
> +++ b/lib/dpif-netdev.c
> @@ -279,8 +279,9 @@ enum dp_stat_type {
>  };
> 
>  enum pmd_cycles_counter_type {
> -    PMD_CYCLES_POLLING,         /* Cycles spent polling NICs. */
> -    PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING,      /* Cycles spent processing packets */
> +    PMD_CYCLES_IDLE,            /* Cycles spent idle or unsuccessful
> polling */
> +    PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING,      /* Cycles spent successfully polling and
> +                                 * processing polled packets */
>      PMD_N_CYCLES
>  };
> 
> @@ -755,10 +756,10 @@ pmd_info_show_stats(struct ds *reply,
>      }
> 
>      ds_put_format(reply,
> -                  "\tpolling cycles:%"PRIu64" (%.02f%%)\n"
> +                  "\tidle cycles:%"PRIu64" (%.02f%%)\n"
>                    "\tprocessing cycles:%"PRIu64" (%.02f%%)\n",
> -                  cycles[PMD_CYCLES_POLLING],
> -                  cycles[PMD_CYCLES_POLLING] / (double)total_cycles *
> 100,
> +                  cycles[PMD_CYCLES_IDLE],
> +                  cycles[PMD_CYCLES_IDLE] / (double)total_cycles * 100,
>                    cycles[PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING],
>                    cycles[PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING] / (double)total_cycles *
> 100);
> 
> @@ -2953,30 +2954,43 @@ cycles_count_end(struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread *pmd,
>      non_atomic_ullong_add(&pmd->cycles.n[type], interval);  }
> 
> -static void
> +/* Calculate the intermediate cycle result and add to the counter
> +'type' */ static inline void cycles_count_intermediate(struct
> +dp_netdev_pmd_thread *pmd,
> +                          enum pmd_cycles_counter_type type)
> +    OVS_NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS
> +{
> +    unsigned long long new_cycles = cycles_counter();
> +    unsigned long long interval = new_cycles - pmd->last_cycles;
> +    pmd->last_cycles = new_cycles;
> +
> +    non_atomic_ullong_add(&pmd->cycles.n[type], interval); }
> +
> +static int
>  dp_netdev_process_rxq_port(struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread *pmd,
>                             struct netdev_rxq *rx,
>                             odp_port_t port_no)  {
>      struct dp_packet_batch batch;
>      int error;
> +    int batch_cnt = 0;
> 
>      dp_packet_batch_init(&batch);
> -    cycles_count_start(pmd);
>      error = netdev_rxq_recv(rx, &batch);
> -    cycles_count_end(pmd, PMD_CYCLES_POLLING);
>      if (!error) {
>          *recirc_depth_get() = 0;
> 
> -        cycles_count_start(pmd);
> +        batch_cnt = batch.count;
>          dp_netdev_input(pmd, &batch, port_no);
> -        cycles_count_end(pmd, PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING);
>      } else if (error != EAGAIN && error != EOPNOTSUPP) {
>          static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(1, 5);
> 
>          VLOG_ERR_RL(&rl, "error receiving data from %s: %s",
>                      netdev_rxq_get_name(rx), ovs_strerror(error));
>      }
> +
> +    return batch_cnt;
>  }
> 
>  static struct tx_port *
> @@ -3438,21 +3452,29 @@ dpif_netdev_run(struct dpif *dpif)
>      struct dp_netdev *dp = get_dp_netdev(dpif);
>      struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread *non_pmd;
>      uint64_t new_tnl_seq;
> +    int process_packets = 0;
> 
>      ovs_mutex_lock(&dp->port_mutex);
>      non_pmd = dp_netdev_get_pmd(dp, NON_PMD_CORE_ID);
>      if (non_pmd) {
>          ovs_mutex_lock(&dp->non_pmd_mutex);
> +        cycles_count_start(non_pmd);
>          HMAP_FOR_EACH (port, node, &dp->ports) {
>              if (!netdev_is_pmd(port->netdev)) {
>                  int i;
> 
>                  for (i = 0; i < port->n_rxq; i++) {
> -                    dp_netdev_process_rxq_port(non_pmd, port->rxqs[i].rx,
> -                                               port->port_no);
> +                    process_packets =
> +                        dp_netdev_process_rxq_port(non_pmd,
> +                                                   port->rxqs[i].rx,
> +                                                   port->port_no);
> +                    cycles_count_intermediate(non_pmd, process_packets ?
> +
> PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING
> +                                                     :
> + PMD_CYCLES_IDLE);
>                  }
>              }
>          }
> +        cycles_count_end(non_pmd, PMD_CYCLES_IDLE);
>          dpif_netdev_xps_revalidate_pmd(non_pmd, time_msec(), false);
>          ovs_mutex_unlock(&dp->non_pmd_mutex);
> 
> @@ -3577,6 +3599,7 @@ pmd_thread_main(void *f_)
>      bool exiting;
>      int poll_cnt;
>      int i;
> +    int process_packets = 0;
> 
>      poll_list = NULL;
> 
> @@ -3603,10 +3626,15 @@ reload:
>          lc = UINT_MAX;
>      }
> 
> +    cycles_count_start(pmd);
>      for (;;) {
>          for (i = 0; i < poll_cnt; i++) {
> -            dp_netdev_process_rxq_port(pmd, poll_list[i].rx,
> -                                       poll_list[i].port_no);
> +            process_packets =
> +                dp_netdev_process_rxq_port(pmd, poll_list[i].rx,
> +                                           poll_list[i].port_no);
> +            cycles_count_intermediate(pmd,
> +                                      process_packets ?
> PMD_CYCLES_PROCESSING
> +                                                      :
> + PMD_CYCLES_IDLE);
>          }
> 
>          if (lc++ > 1024) {
> @@ -3627,6 +3655,8 @@ reload:
>          }
>      }
> 
> +    cycles_count_end(pmd, PMD_CYCLES_IDLE);
> +
>      poll_cnt = pmd_load_queues_and_ports(pmd, &poll_list);
>      exiting = latch_is_set(&pmd->exit_latch);
>      /* Signal here to make sure the pmd finishes diff --git
> a/vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in b/vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in index
> fc19f3b..2e6e684 100644
> --- a/vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in
> +++ b/vswitchd/ovs-vswitchd.8.in
> @@ -253,7 +253,10 @@ The sum of ``emc hits'', ``masked hits'' and ``miss''
> is the number of  packets received by the datapath.  Cycles are counted
> using the TSC or similar  facilities (when available on the platform).  To
> reset these counters use  \fBdpif-netdev/pmd-stats-clear\fR. The duration
> of one cycle depends on the -measuring infrastructure.
> +measuring infrastructure. ``idle cycles'' refers to cycles spent
> +polling devices but not receiving any packets. ``processing cycles''
> +refers to cycles spent polling devices and sucessfully receiving

Typo above in 'sucessfully'

> +packets, plus the cycles spent processing said packets.
>  .IP "\fBdpif-netdev/pmd-stats-clear\fR [\fIdp\fR]"
>  Resets to zero the per pmd thread performance numbers shown by the
> \fBdpif-netdev/pmd-stats-show\fR command.  It will NOT reset datapath or
> --

Other than that LGTM. I've tested behavior and verified compilation with gcc, clang and sparse.

Acked-by: Ian Stokes <ian.stokes at intel.com>
Tested-by: Ian Stokes <ian.stokes at intel.com>


More information about the dev mailing list