From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it1-f179.google.com (mail-it1-f179.google.com [209.85.166.179]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3A1239 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 04:07:02 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-it1-f179.google.com with SMTP id h13so10765782itl.1 for ; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 19:07:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2mnZCzLhTwhEcmerMzFavd1s+u/GMNKsakDtO/35d6k=; b=hTXbUHq/7WRiHL4q4sC2BBN903GQjuhZO/MT5i7n0w3+pkqhJbJgTco9P4qYMG7+mq NuJP4fuXxCsRVGc7xtoWdBeWVvlJnOd8Kgue6UMxYfKFvuoQxMGgQNUcIuhLeACM25/F 66k4v7OPvQVqMQC6HKl/QXuFby5MqLV/0cIRAkkFiGQsFy6HUiPz+7/ejqYmlykiXMxU wqATvXpzlHIOsyuy0xQtcUhZxaej0tTAydZhpjeNdiDW62bvYJfN9otZmaSTy0jDNYtV DukXU54eJHC7sURMDX+7nqrFhnnMH0rASMm/fhoywwIGDWoril+hHUzn4MkQkLxwluUJ qp4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2mnZCzLhTwhEcmerMzFavd1s+u/GMNKsakDtO/35d6k=; b=oUMY60MCU4y2S8+B4Z/8Qx6UdXep+yS1h7bhaXGF0k+gQfkhdBLAZKpZup0Hk8udKM /B2qJBdIHlgFbLOyFE8OZfkOQj7N912muawEur66hVG+/Yo5u/08it+ORUYUToa0h/RK 7GIlG3mWwgrzRjmjzmvGH5QUe/XD2UYcrNM/Bxh5KhNgLrWQLMUFeLvlse7kh3ivpGav 43UrIFEFvazhHNPPeOGDnIatE+87F+L1kqn6JqAql1d/SCKGwkSark+DLWH/g8l63oSd Aaaa8g66jt53zldSG2QaLtj54Uzsg9dpXblJXXGQlya2+6segXTJ6tKYzprqz+3jsq9Y slTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKFiyp3ziOttNASTD+TSktF1SoNjlFXFMzcyoTLfOk3HHzW5B6O Ln/48IL9Pd4u4IgZf193rj0WwMSmppc3d7G6TcWd0w+R X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dEU3kA8AmR2sr+7rfZSEF2p/MlbWG1AvPGzePVSTib899Dy7xUohDcbW0/jchYkXv8xPdVkhLcYN8EWdsdUug= X-Received: by 2002:a24:508a:: with SMTP id m132-v6mr5181631itb.19.1541387221685; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 19:07:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Sungho Hong Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 20:06:50 -0700 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] Understanding the Proper way of using ip fragmentation X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 03:07:03 -0000 Hello DPDK experts, I am having trouble applying ip fragmentation in multiple cores. Really thankful if somebody can point out what I am doing wrong here. *Purpose* I am trying to apply ip fragmentation in multiple cores, and maximize the throughput performance with messages that are bigger than MTU. for each local & remote host (using 1 to 8 logical cores) 1 ~ 4 for transferring fragmented message 4 ~ 8 for receiving and assemble message *Method of Throughput -testing * Sending 4KB message from local and remote echos the message back to the local. *Problem * If I try to allocate fragmentation table to each of the cores, I get a segmentation error, and this happens no matter I shrink the size of the fragmentation table. The way I have tried to allocate the pools and frag-table are like this below. for each coreid, coreid < allocated cores; coreid++ fragmentation_table[coreid] = rte_ip_frag_table_create(...); direct_pool[coreid] = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(...); indirect_pool[coreid] rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(...); So alternatively, I have allocated multiple fragmentation table for each lcores but let the direct and indirect pools be shared together. for each coreid, coreid < allocated cores; coreid++ fragmentation_table[coreid] = rte_ip_frag_table_create(...); direct_pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(...); indirect_pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create(...); *Situation* Now when I send messages using multiple cores from local to remote host, the remote host only successfully receive the message when I send the message adding a delay such as ( adding sleep(1); for each message send. ) I was able to receive the message from local to remote. But, cannot receive any data when I try to send them without any delay. Personally, I suspect that I should allocate direct pool and indirect pool for each logical cores, and I think that is the main issue. Since I was only able to successfully use the frag-table using only one logical core, I suspect that I am not using the fragmentation table correctly in multiple cores. I really want to hear from the DPDK experts about this issue I am facing, and will be really grateful for any advice on this...