From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mo69.mail-out.ovh.net (mo69.mail-out.ovh.net [178.32.228.69]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0BBA592E for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 07:41:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail643.ha.ovh.net (gw6.ovh.net [213.251.189.206]) by mo69.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with SMTP id C0AC31000214 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 07:43:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 10 Mar 2014 08:43:19 +0200 Received: from lneuilly-152-23-9-75.w193-252.abo.wanadoo.fr (HELO pcdeff) (ff@ozog.com@193.252.40.75) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 10 Mar 2014 08:43:17 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois-Fr=E9d=E9ric_Ozog?= To: "'Bob Chen'" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 07:39:14 +0100 Message-ID: <00ec01cf3c2b$74436d70$5cca4850$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac88JJmRYejsaGXoSFe0Ai0zkHUU7QAA6lug Content-Language: fr X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 6846878809295149222 X-Ovh-Remote: 193.252.40.75 (lneuilly-152-23-9-75.w193-252.abo.wanadoo.fr) X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) X-OVH-SPAMSTATE: OK X-OVH-SPAMSCORE: 0 X-OVH-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeejuddrudejucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecu X-Spam-Check: DONE|U 0.52333/N X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeejuddrudejucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecu Cc: 'dev' Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] dpdk vs netmap X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 06:41:52 -0000 Well done!=20 I guess that's the shortest question on the list, and probably the one that's going to trigger the largest discussion. A few months, ago I had to answer it for a customer. And here is my understanding: - DPDK is also a high performance multi-core application framework. You = take out the packet framework and DPDK has still value because it allows you = to get the most of a multi-core environment. In other words, if you want to develop say an accelerated web server, you have better chances to = achieve the best results with DPDK because it does not stop providing = performance helpers at the "packet pump" level: threading model, high performance = memory management, high performance locking in userland... - DPDK programming requires more effort at the beginning because of this multi-core environment - DPDK is now at the center of an informal eco-system. Not too long from now, I assume you will have a "DPDK-store" from which you will obtain = either freely or with a fee a lot of additional components: TCP/IP stack... Now if you want detailed comparison on the performance aspects.... Here = is my view: on a simple L2/L3 packet forwarding "proof of concept" with 2 = ports you will find them equal: the CPU does not do enough. So you need to = model your application and try it with at least 2 ports on both environments. = And you probably want to put it at serious test with 8, 16 or even 22 ports. Then you'll get your answer. Bet's are open. I put a beer on DPDK ;-) =20 Fran=E7ois-Fr=E9d=E9ric > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] De la part de Bob Chen > Envoy=E9=A0: lundi 10 mars 2014 06:49 > =C0=A0: dev > Objet=A0: [dpdk-dev] dpdk vs netmap >=20 > What's the advantage of DPDK over another accelaration framework = called > netmap?