From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Received: from mail-pg0-f49.google.com (mail-pg0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7639A2A5E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  1 Mar 2017 07:24:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id p5so17036863pga.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:24:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=d2px0QYsp9zreOwruuEMoF8s+faeRYkHYehc32tlOmc=;
 b=epSaNMfCF5FEewty2QK97sHkX578Ln269vyNhcomMg+TQIAXEowNq59I4eHR3FaYnC
 NdBTyKNkG4Bx6zHxEpIOVw72YIYl/E70yxJ28IHDgIo7kl45EJl6uieX72xEe1Y+5nNW
 Pz3s9J8sspsR87NrtAHkMmVVg2hVOafD01YGOrG0mnxFxCq2zIKaLBim0LFO9a8+XLO/
 WenhNsL6WI/DjqtrKx4571AK13bBjDDVHSw8H8+D8ZDwG9kXWP0kVVQpHQsRxlYnYvpj
 UGsieGjbzu0sJ/hedo0049wGwP2tfMvSIdvgm0T1saZ8NECIodzV6Lysyf4MWrzG+OY2
 +v5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=d2px0QYsp9zreOwruuEMoF8s+faeRYkHYehc32tlOmc=;
 b=Ie00+VEvYc0BRTU2N4xVjSzS7tR58AZjl8j1YosvIHbEaUsvZnY4G78v0fqwGWfaUT
 RAoFroMrX4ce5amnQRp8LZMLwjmK0f1yP56tCtqEcfzBBdM3M3U7oDvHL5DEezE+yI3n
 d9pEyBnSpEKLyHBFvS1/cGPloAWpwcwCQn590n0O3PuRFXXKSlhmasVIOAd/JG5Y4HWg
 EYC3+kFH46tA3q38Jy4KgF5VS4eL7aeHkuB/xSfAaOh6l1E5T6pLKVUhXiwMwkdAytzO
 hIJuUaZsFucGl/+ESSx7YrlUOxPjFNwQIB5ee5IiWNEDcSoeMmFd7vqSnggzsSrGaiNM
 B2pg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nLYPZbUFayqq3ck7cmTtQGTK2nsuN22Ktd86nWp4RQeS6NtoDq5dsvlQkuL6fNSQ==
X-Received: by 10.84.199.170 with SMTP id r39mr3067944pld.144.1488349466733;
 Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xeon-e3 (204-195-18-65.wavecable.com. [204.195.18.65])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o1sm7798216pgf.63.2017.02.28.22.24.26
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256);
 Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:24:19 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Joo Kim <itsolution@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20170228222419.1ced1cb2@xeon-e3>
In-Reply-To: <CAFj4wcL2PVD3YHArPb7gXmMr_YZoFodaTaEKbU0YtNmk1R3GUw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFj4wcL2PVD3YHArPb7gXmMr_YZoFodaTaEKbU0YtNmk1R3GUw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] What is the max size of packets rte_eth_tx_burst()
 can send practically/theoritically?
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 06:24:27 -0000

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:28:21 -0800
Joo Kim <itsolution@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> 
> For example, as I understand,  ovs-dpdk code  uses a buffer of size 32
> when it transmits via rte_eth_tx_burst().
> 
> I think it can transmit more packets in a bust.
> I know there should be a balance between throughput and latency. But, I am
> wondering what max size packets  a dpdk application can give  to
> rte_eth_tx_burst()  practically/theoretically?
> (I see some max macro in ixgbe_rxtx.h)
> 
> Thanks

You could theoretically transmit a burst size up to the configured number of TX descriptors.
The downside is you will add latency and have to handle the TX ring getting full more often.
Bigger burst sizes really don't win that much. 50% of the gain happens by just sending 2 at a time.