From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6F6A0351; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 17:45:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 270231C0B; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 17:45:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-lj1-f174.google.com (mail-lj1-f174.google.com [209.85.208.174]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6C3B62; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 17:45:37 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lj1-f174.google.com with SMTP id d5so19734332ljl.4; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:45:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jp75NdyKNbLVrf4cl4PeIE13q693ZEkF9M/tunkADwU=; b=BDDw71/vzHl+b5JabLSq5rS7zb3/GmflkuxPxdZU6Ly7crWLOqLMIS4JYaDxpRFg/t 4zTMJ1PVgvYnOlRVq0SLnY7MBlkazXyh5y285bv5aMkzffuOs95RREMvrKE0DFaggFBp J1a79RUWkTqBS5uZzCEUp0XipA7tPzh+8riqqvBbInqLKENLng5a9oJQEx2tVuobi9sZ GX4GsApwHHc+XvfRQaroktO3AjBfvSClxoni5kudJEKE/gG+37zinVI7Ux+hFsymgpkp I71JQXcMzB91WKuu4jQWFOwEYQt9hOt89zr+IwdanI59fg0cNulTUuyeDq4v0RlUCbM3 8QLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jp75NdyKNbLVrf4cl4PeIE13q693ZEkF9M/tunkADwU=; b=X1zu9GhHjT1R1ZOB4Flt+B52GtqjGfjSn+4x1JILIzZe9LQCDPSc+TZbpV44ea8ARj /0EQb83Z+DxskplyppMNv5YnrKn9TezK4sNYB6hsVqGcx8B+yoR5JWeC1FjS9aG2/x9P MayP0b97hd38hvRwAn2iX+ncRXJ31clKMLiB/KpVJ7fRPNdVOVEyzJlJZA+5Gv1zRVWP 76N9OCKiPDuPEocMXuYZP7WRDRx+ecpVivkhL0MmYgn7qnyEL1wpS9ZpHuQ/6g1ixK9T Ftak6mUodjbl1/5gv7vjKyWvdXu2Agl57xiCowhs/pUPMB+J3TmypEpoOx+UDAd4/gUc CWsw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW/qZuWggCJfnfjQZ5DSTB0k8j1grnyut8DKvBab4vDFzQZSloO N0LScL+1EJH4Ksik8fV/twIIzapnmBEPs9Ng35pWIe3Z X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyrnq5T3k6qwr2CXTZjNT33QxU+i2hHm4Z/JUKGkXba6lHdKmwhNrdF/A6h8H5WAj2pGJzhgvsbVscXNHDnsuc= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3e0f:: with SMTP id l15mr245010lja.209.1574095536394; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:45:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Venumadhav Josyula Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 22:15:23 +0530 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org Cc: Venumadhav Josyula Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] time taken for allocation of mempool. X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" PL note I am using dpdk 18-11... On Wed, 13 Nov, 2019, 10:37 am Venumadhav Josyula, wrote: > Hi , > We are using 'rte_mempool_create' for allocation of flow memory. This has > been there for a while. We just migrated to dpdk-18.11 from dpdk-17.05. Now > here is problem statement > > Problem statement : > In new dpdk ( 18.11 ), the 'rte_mempool_create' take approximately ~4.4 > sec for allocation compared to older dpdk (17.05). We have som 8-9 mempools > for our entire product. We do upfront allocation for all of them ( i.e. > when dpdk application is coming up). Our application is run to completion > model. > > Questions:- > i) is that acceptable / has anybody seen such a thing ? > ii) What has changed between two dpdk versions ( 18.11 v/s 17.05 ) from > memory perspective ? > > Any pointer are welcome. > > Thanks & regards > Venu >