On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 11:02:14 +0100
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> BTW, do you have numbers comparing the AVX2 version with the C code? I
> quickly had a look at your numbers, but not clear to me if this is
> compared there.
No, sorry, I didn't report that anywhere, I probably should have in
the commit messages for 4/8 and 5/8. This was from v1 at 4/8, single
thread on AMD Epyc 7351, C implementation without unrolled loops:
TEST: performance
net,port [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 9971887pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 5991032pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 2666255pps
set with 1000 full, ranged entries: 2220404pps
port,net [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 10004499pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 6011221pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 4035566pps
set with 100 full, ranged entries: 4018240pps
net6,port [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 9497500pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 4685436pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 1354978pps
set with 1000 full, ranged entries: 1052188pps
port,proto [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 10749256pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 6774103pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 2819211pps
set with 30000 full, ranged entries: 283492pps
net6,port,mac [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 9463935pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 3777039pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 2943527pps
set with 10 full, ranged entries: 1927899pps
net6,port,mac,proto [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 9502200pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 3637739pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 1342323pps
set with 1000 full, ranged entries: 753960pps
net,mac [ OK ]
baseline (drop from netdev hook): 10065715pps
baseline hash (non-ranged entries): 5082895pps
baseline rbtree (match on first field only): 2677391pps
set with 1000 full, ranged entries: 1215104pps
I would re-run tests on v3 patches and include the comparisons in
commit messages.
By the way, as you can see, even though the comparison with rbtree is
unfair (comparing > 1 fields adds substantial complexity), without AVX2
it doesn't scale as nicely. I plan to propose some optimisations that
should substantially improve the non-vectorised case, but what I have
in mind right now is a bit convoluted and I would skip it in this
initial submission.
--
Stefano
