Hi,
On 7/4/2023 5:52 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
> Hou Tao wrote:
>> From: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The benchmark could be used to compare the performance of hash map
>> operations and the memory usage between different flavors of bpf memory
>> allocator (e.g., no bpf ma vs bpf ma vs reuse-after-gp bpf ma). It also
>> could be used to check the performance improvement or the memory saving
>> provided by optimization.
>>
SNIP
>> overwrite per-prod-op: 191.92 ± 0.07k/s, avg mem: 1.23 ± 0.00MiB, peak mem: 1.49MiB
>> batch_add_batch_del per-prod-op: 218.10 ± 0.25k/s, avg mem: 1.23 ± 0.00MiB, peak mem: 1.49MiB
>> add_del_on_diff_cpu per-prod-op: 39.59 ± 0.41k/s, avg mem: 1.48 ± 0.11MiB, peak mem: 1.74MiB
>>
>> (3) normal bpf memory allocator
>>
>> overwrite per-prod-op: 134.81 ± 0.22k/s, avg mem: 1.67 ± 0.12MiB, peak mem: 2.74MiB
>> batch_add_batch_del per-prod-op: 90.44 ± 0.34k/s, avg mem: 2.27 ± 0.00MiB, peak mem: 2.74MiB
>> add_del_on_diff_cpu per-prod-op: 28.20 ± 0.15k/s, avg mem: 1.73 ± 0.17MiB, peak mem: 2.06MiB
> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for the Ack.
>
>> +
>> +static error_t htab_mem_parse_arg(int key, char *arg, struct argp_state *state)
>> +{
>> + switch (key) {
>> + case ARG_VALUE_SIZE:
>> + args.value_size = strtoul(arg, NULL, 10);
>> + if (args.value_size > 4096) {
>> + fprintf(stderr, "too big value size %u\n", args.value_size);
>> + argp_usage(state);
>> + }
>> + break;
>> + case ARG_USE_CASE:
>> + args.use_case = strdup(arg);
> might be worth checking for null and returning an error? Only matters if we
> run from CI or something and then this looks like a flake.
Will fix. I also found an error reported from BPF CI llvm-16 build
procedure: "benchs/bench_htab_mem.c:45:27: error: initializer element is
not a compile-time constant". Will fix in v9.
>
>> + break;
>> + case ARG_PREALLOCATED:
>> + args.preallocated = true;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + return ARGP_ERR_UNKNOWN;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
