DPDK usage discussions
 help / color / Atom feed
* [dpdk-users]  DPDK and isolcpus
@ 2019-07-26 14:56 曾懷恩
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: 曾懷恩 @ 2019-07-26 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: contact; +Cc: users

Hi Filip,

Do you use Mellanox NIC?

In my experience, rte_lcore_count only counts those lcores that are not isolated when using mlx5 driver.

And Intel ixgbe counts lcores correctly even I use isolcpus flag

BR, 

Sent from my iPhone

> From: Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>
> To: "users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
> Subject: [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
> Message-ID:
>   <e98abf2a-b1cf-5fee-7929-778f70390d1d@filipjaniszewski.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've configured a bunch of my box cores with isolcpus and nohz_full in
> the attempt to squeeze a little more performance out of them, but,
> apparently I can't use those core in DPDK anymore as it seems that
> rte_lcore_count reports only core which are not isolated, also I can't
> launch any thread (rte_eal_remote_launch) on those cores.
> 
> In my understanding
> (http://doc.dpdk.org/spp-18.02/setup/performance_opt.html) I should be
> able to "Use the isolcpus Linux kernel parameter to isolate them from
> Linux scheduler to reduce context switches. It prevents workloads of
> other processes than DPDK running on reserved cores with isolcpus
> parameter." but can't make it work.
> 
> Which is the correct way to bind DPDK threads to isolated cpus?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> BR, Filip
> +48 666 369 823
> 
> 
> End of users Digest, Vol 196, Issue 5
> *************************************

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
  2019-07-26 14:50 ` 曾懷恩
@ 2019-07-26 14:56   ` Stephen Hemminger
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2019-07-26 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 曾懷恩; +Cc: users

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 22:50:47 +0800
曾懷恩 <the@csie.io> wrote:

> Hi Filip,
> 
> Do you use Mellanox NIC?
> 
> In my experience, rte_lcore_count only counts those lcores that are not isolated when using mlx5 driver.
> 
> And Intel ixgbe counts lcores correctly even I use isolcpus flag
> 
> BR, 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > From: Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>
> > To: "users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
> > Message-ID:
> >    <e98abf2a-b1cf-5fee-7929-778f70390d1d@filipjaniszewski.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've configured a bunch of my box cores with isolcpus and nohz_full in
> > the attempt to squeeze a little more performance out of them, but,
> > apparently I can't use those core in DPDK anymore as it seems that
> > rte_lcore_count reports only core which are not isolated, also I can't
> > launch any thread (rte_eal_remote_launch) on those cores.
> > 
> > In my understanding
> > (http://doc.dpdk.org/spp-18.02/setup/performance_opt.html) I should be
> > able to "Use the isolcpus Linux kernel parameter to isolate them from
> > Linux scheduler to reduce context switches. It prevents workloads of
> > other processes than DPDK running on reserved cores with isolcpus
> > parameter." but can't make it work.
> > 
> > Which is the correct way to bind DPDK threads to isolated cpus?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > -- 
> > BR, Filip
> > +48 666 369 823
> > 
> > 
> > End of users Digest, Vol 196, Issue 5
> > *************************************  

The default behavior of DPDK is to use all CPU's it finds.
To use isolated CPU's you need to pass the cpu's to use on the command line.

dpdk-XXX -l 4-7 ...

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
       [not found] <mailman.1.1564135202.18507.users@dpdk.org>
@ 2019-07-26 14:50 ` 曾懷恩
  2019-07-26 14:56   ` Stephen Hemminger
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: 曾懷恩 @ 2019-07-26 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: users

Hi Filip,

Do you use Mellanox NIC?

In my experience, rte_lcore_count only counts those lcores that are not isolated when using mlx5 driver.

And Intel ixgbe counts lcores correctly even I use isolcpus flag

BR, 

Sent from my iPhone

> From: Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>
> To: "users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
> Subject: [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
> Message-ID:
>    <e98abf2a-b1cf-5fee-7929-778f70390d1d@filipjaniszewski.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've configured a bunch of my box cores with isolcpus and nohz_full in
> the attempt to squeeze a little more performance out of them, but,
> apparently I can't use those core in DPDK anymore as it seems that
> rte_lcore_count reports only core which are not isolated, also I can't
> launch any thread (rte_eal_remote_launch) on those cores.
> 
> In my understanding
> (http://doc.dpdk.org/spp-18.02/setup/performance_opt.html) I should be
> able to "Use the isolcpus Linux kernel parameter to isolate them from
> Linux scheduler to reduce context switches. It prevents workloads of
> other processes than DPDK running on reserved cores with isolcpus
> parameter." but can't make it work.
> 
> Which is the correct way to bind DPDK threads to isolated cpus?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> BR, Filip
> +48 666 369 823
> 
> 
> End of users Digest, Vol 196, Issue 5
> *************************************

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus
@ 2019-07-26  6:17 Filip Janiszewski
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Filip Janiszewski @ 2019-07-26  6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: users

Hi,

I've configured a bunch of my box cores with isolcpus and nohz_full in
the attempt to squeeze a little more performance out of them, but,
apparently I can't use those core in DPDK anymore as it seems that
rte_lcore_count reports only core which are not isolated, also I can't
launch any thread (rte_eal_remote_launch) on those cores.

In my understanding
(http://doc.dpdk.org/spp-18.02/setup/performance_opt.html) I should be
able to "Use the isolcpus Linux kernel parameter to isolate them from
Linux scheduler to reduce context switches. It prevents workloads of
other processes than DPDK running on reserved cores with isolcpus
parameter." but can't make it work.

Which is the correct way to bind DPDK threads to isolated cpus?

Thanks

-- 
BR, Filip
+48 666 369 823

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-07-26 14:56 [dpdk-users] DPDK and isolcpus 曾懷恩
     [not found] <mailman.1.1564135202.18507.users@dpdk.org>
2019-07-26 14:50 ` 曾懷恩
2019-07-26 14:56   ` Stephen Hemminger
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-07-26  6:17 Filip Janiszewski

DPDK usage discussions

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/users/0 users/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 users users/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/users \
		users@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index users


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.users


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox