On 2025/1/17 2:02, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > Benchmark (bench_page_pool_simple) results from before and after > patchset with patches 1-5m and rcu lock removal as requested. > > | Test name |Cycles | 1-5 | | Nanosec | 1-5 | | % | > | (tasklet_*)|Before | After |diff| Before | After | diff | change | > |------------+-------+-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------| > | fast_path | 19 | 19 | 0| 5.399 | 5.492 | 0.093 | 1.7 | > | ptr_ring | 54 | 57 | 3| 15.090 | 15.849 | 0.759 | 5.0 | > | slow | 238 | 284 | 46| 66.134 | 78.909 | 12.775 | 19.3 | > #+TBLFM: $4=$3-$2::$7=$6-$5::$8=(($7/$5)*100);%.1f > > This test with patches 1-5 looks much better regarding performance. Thanks for the testing. Is there any notiable performance variation during different test running for the same built kernel in your machine? > > --Jesper > > https://github.com/xdp-project/xdp-project/blob/main/areas/mem/page_pool07_bench_DMA_fix.org#e5-1650-pp01-dma-fix-v7-p1-5 > > Kernel: > - 6.13.0-rc6-pp01-DMA-fix-v7-p1-5+ #5 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu Jan 16 18:06:53 CET 2025 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > Machine: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-1650 v4 @ 3.60GHz > > modprobe bench_page_pool_simple loops=100000000 > > Raw data: > [ 187.309423] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 187.872849] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool01 Per elem: 19 cycles(tsc) 5.539 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.553906443 sec time_interval:553906443) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:1994123064) > [ 187.892023] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 189.611070] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool02 Per elem: 61 cycles(tsc) 17.095 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.709580367 sec time_interval:1709580367) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:6154679394) > [ 189.630414] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 197.222387] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool03 Per elem: 272 cycles(tsc) 75.826 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:7.582681388 sec time_interval:7582681388) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:27298499214) > [ 197.241926] bench_page_pool_simple: pp_tasklet_handler(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 197.249968] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 197.808470] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path Per elem: 19 cycles(tsc) 5.492 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.549225541 sec time_interval:549225541) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:1977272238) > [ 197.828174] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 199.422305] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool02_ptr_ring Per elem: 57 cycles(tsc) 15.849 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.584920736 sec time_interval:1584920736) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:5705890830) > [ 199.442087] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 207.342120] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool03_slow Per elem: 284 cycles(tsc) 78.909 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:7.890955151 sec time_interval:7890955151) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:28408319289) >
