DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Outlook for DPDK multi-process support
@ 2023-02-08 14:03 Lukáš Šišmiš
  2023-02-09  0:12 ` Stephen Hemminger
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Lukáš Šišmiš @ 2023-02-08 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev

Hello all,


I'd like to ask you about future outlook of multi-process support in 
DPDK (https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/multi_proc_support.html).

On DPDK Userspace 2022, I have presented a solution that uses 
multi-process support (https://youtu.be/TtiR74w3Yv4) in Suricata IDS.

But after the talk, some people have reached out to me and suggested 
that multi-process support might not be supported in the long-term.

As I would like to continue developing the concept further, I thought it 
might be a good idea to consult the idea and possibly open the discussion.


As an alternative solution to multi-process support I see either 
vhost-user/virtio/vDPA or VF. However, I couldn't find any performance 
benchmarks on this topic.

Further guidance is highly appreciated.

Thank you all in advance.


Best regards,

Lukas Sismis


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: Outlook for DPDK multi-process support
  2023-02-08 14:03 Outlook for DPDK multi-process support Lukáš Šišmiš
@ 2023-02-09  0:12 ` Stephen Hemminger
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2023-02-09  0:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lukáš Šišmiš; +Cc: dev

On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 15:03:43 +0100
Lukáš Šišmiš <sismis@cesnet.cz> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> 
> I'd like to ask you about future outlook of multi-process support in 
> DPDK (https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/multi_proc_support.html).
> 
> On DPDK Userspace 2022, I have presented a solution that uses 
> multi-process support (https://youtu.be/TtiR74w3Yv4) in Suricata IDS.
> 
> But after the talk, some people have reached out to me and suggested 
> that multi-process support might not be supported in the long-term.

Impossible to predict the future, but until/unless something better is developed
there will be users.

> 
> As I would like to continue developing the concept further, I thought it 
> might be a good idea to consult the idea and possibly open the discussion.
> 
> 
> As an alternative solution to multi-process support I see either 
> vhost-user/virtio/vDPA or VF. However, I couldn't find any performance 
> benchmarks on this topic.

The issue has been that some drivers and API's don't work with multi-process
support. If it is in the documentation for the configuration it should work
but like almost anything in software, until is implemented, tested, and maintained
there is no perfect way to tell.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-02-09  0:12 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-02-08 14:03 Outlook for DPDK multi-process support Lukáš Šišmiš
2023-02-09  0:12 ` Stephen Hemminger

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).