DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Victor Huertas <vhuertas@gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com
Subject: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: high latency detected in IP pipeline example
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:41:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGxG5chUzK+TeLY+FGJAhwGPxE0dnV7+Cby7Q_KJjwtMOmNdLg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGxG5cjY+npJ7wVqcb9MXdtKkpC6RrgYpDQA2qbaAjD7i7C2EQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I am developing my own DPDK application basing it in the dpdk-stable
ip_pipeline example.
At this moment I am using the 17.11 LTS version of DPDK and I amb observing
some extrange behaviour. Maybe it is an old issue that can be solved
quickly so I would appreciate it if some expert can shade a light on this.

The ip_pipeline example allows you to develop Pipelines that perform
specific packet processing functions (ROUTING, FLOW_CLASSIFYING, etc...).
The thing is that I am extending some of this pipelines with my own.
However I want to take advantage of the built-in ip_pipeline capability of
arbitrarily assigning the logical core where the pipeline (f_run()
function) must be executed so that i can adapt the packet processing power
to the amount of the number of cores available.
Taking this into account I have observed something strange. I show you this
simple example below.

Case 1:
[PIPELINE 0 MASTER core =0]
[PIPELINE 1 core=1] --- SWQ1--->[PIPELINE 2 core=2] -----SWQ2---->
[PIPELINE 3 core=3]

Case 2:
[PIPELINE 0 MASTER core =0]
[PIPELINE 1 core=1] --- SWQ1--->[PIPELINE 2 core=1] -----SWQ2---->
[PIPELINE 3 core=1]

I send a ping between two hosts connected at both sides of the pipeline
model which allows these pings to cross all the pipelines (from 1 to 3).
What I observe in Case 1 (each pipeline has its own thread in different
core) is that the reported RTT is less than 1 ms, whereas in Case 2 (all
pipelines except MASTER are run in the same thread) is 20 ms. Furthermore,
in Case 2, if I increase a lot (hundreds of Mbps) the packet rate this RTT
decreases to 3 or 4 ms.

Has somebody observed this behaviour in the past? Can it be solved somehow?

Thanks a lot for your attention
-- 
Victor


-- 
Victor

       reply	other threads:[~2020-02-17 16:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CAGxG5cjY+npJ7wVqcb9MXdtKkpC6RrgYpDQA2qbaAjD7i7C2EQ@mail.gmail.com>
2020-02-17 16:41 ` Victor Huertas [this message]
2020-02-17 23:10   ` James Huang
2020-02-18  7:04     ` Victor Huertas
2020-02-18  7:18       ` James Huang
2020-02-18  9:49         ` Victor Huertas
2020-02-18 22:08           ` James Huang
2020-02-19  8:29             ` Victor Huertas
2020-02-19 10:37               ` [dpdk-dev] Fwd: " Victor Huertas
2020-02-19 10:53                 ` Olivier Matz
2020-02-19 12:05                   ` Victor Huertas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGxG5chUzK+TeLY+FGJAhwGPxE0dnV7+Cby7Q_KJjwtMOmNdLg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=vhuertas@gmail.com \
    --cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).