From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 420C041C40;
	Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:03:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8AA4014F;
	Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:03:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from office2.cesnet.cz (office2.cesnet.cz [195.113.144.244])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3514440141
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:03:28 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPV6:2001:67c:1220:8b4:a708:39aa:deca:91a9] (unknown
 [IPv6:2001:67c:1220:8b4:a708:39aa:deca:91a9])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by office2.cesnet.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0989840006C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:03:28 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cesnet.cz;
 s=office2-2020; t=1675865008;
 bh=tGqGe8pV8SsoJ3JksYtplpPiR+t2foCwShnuM2X5QlU=;
 h=Date:To:From:Subject;
 b=PRE+u/6y4219Ghc3QQMQU99wOtdcmNbNqnk9hE/hO/Ulmm0CFcXdKsYH1ONjGxCES
 VhaFWsqv1DuTrBqK+zYaPySt1mF0L+U9rIwU2iQtvIS+Z+VIqb0PJTvk+bZ5Z04Sx/
 cXzltGX7ra2xx4xHa7rQo+qAzchKU39oaJ2loQqd/jLRk5xyitEI7GltUcDfU8+FX7
 enJaFEnRiJuTRPeqJJv4KIYIuJe5REO8NRUHxWZYZyUFPo083ez43T/G7fCnu5eXWG
 5xto9PLR6/lSrLPxlFUBVPDvUZ3DiDUujyUMs0M90pIWEyoZy0m5WH29xzpBTIY32D
 NXPI8Doa7rz3Q==
Message-ID: <71e8deaf-82f0-407d-244b-322c40ad65ab@cesnet.cz>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 15:03:43 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
To: dev@dpdk.org
Content-Language: en-US
From: =?UTF-8?B?THVrw6HFoSDFoGnFoW1pxaE=?= <sismis@cesnet.cz>
Subject: Outlook for DPDK multi-process support
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

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