[SPDK] Re: A few thoughts about spdk_top

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harris, James R <james.r.harris(a)intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 12:14 AM
> To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>; Szwed, Maciej
> <maciej.szwed(a)intel.com>
> Subject: [SPDK] Re: A few thoughts about spdk_top
> 
> Hi Darek,
> 
> On 4/7/20, 3:30 AM, "Stojaczyk, Dariusz" <dariusz.stojaczyk(a)intel.com> wrote:
> 
>     I like the idea of spdk_top application, although I'm slightly concerned about
> our implementation. Is it a right choice to develop it in C? It's already a huge
> amount of code and it already has a huge amount of limitations, not even
> mentioning possible bugs. I actually spent a lot of time developing in curses,
> GTK, GTKmm and even WinAPI and I don't do it anymore because it's difficult
> and not worth it. I switched to javascript as well as server-side javascript for my
> other projects and I find it incredibly easier to write user apps there. I'm not
> trying to push on javascript specifically, but could we consider writing spdk_top
> in a higher level language, where we don't care about memory allocation, json
> parsing, and printing data to the screen?
> 
> [Jim] I think there's room for multiple user interfaces. Personally, I like a
> terminal-based application like this - I typically run tmux with 4 panes, and
> having something like this in one pane while I'm running a target in the
> foreground in another works well for me.  Maybe something in Python could
> end up as a bit less code?  It's possible, but I look at something like spdkcli and
> it has quite a bit of code too.

Agreed. I prefer CLI apps where possible, although what's the good way to develop them?
I know spdkcli needs to fit in the targetcli-like framework in Python, so there's a fair amount of framework specific code. Maybe for spdk_top we don't necessarily need a framework, just a library? This could use a research to see what's available.

I heard DPDK develops a similar application in Go, although I can't find the code anywhere. There's a presentation on the internet [1] with some screenshots and I have to say it does look impressive. They even draw graphs in CLI, however I slightly question usability of that in particular.

I just don't see our C implementation ever getting as functional as the DPDK one.

> 
> [Jim] Regarding json parsing, I think it is nice to have another use case for our
> client-side JSON RPC APIs.  But you're right, there's about 300 lines of code in
> there specific to issuing RPCs to the app.  Potentially some of that long-term
> could be moved into a common library for other applications that have a need
> for issuing RPCs from a C application.

That's a good point.

> 
>     Currently spdk_top seems to require the same, detailed review as any spdk
> patch and honestly I'm a bit reluctant to review it. Moreover, I find one major
> feature missing there - a view with all pollers on a specific, single thread and
> busy time % for each poller, so that I can see what my thread is most busy with.
> I think it would be the first view I check when doing any spdk optimization. Yet I
> see it's quite a bit of effort to add it to the current spdk_top code, which brings
> me back to my first question.
> 
> [Jim] I think now's the time to provide that feedback on what might be missing.
> But the basic infrastructure is all in place, and knowing Maciek I'm sure he's
> open to suggestions!  I'd encourage everyone to pull down the code and kick
> the proverbial tires.  The end of the series can be found at
> https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/1717/4.  I've also started reviewing
> individual patches and am suggesting areas where the code could be simplified
> a bit.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Jim
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org


[1] https://www.dpdk.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/35/2019/10/MeasuringSoftwarePerformance.pdf (slide 19+)
D.