From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.mhcomputing.net (master.mhcomputing.net [74.208.46.186]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA962C4E4 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 07:50:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.160] (99-34-229-174.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [99.34.229.174]) by mail.mhcomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 14FDC80C003; Mon, 27 Apr 2015 22:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Matthew Hall In-Reply-To: <23D2CA18-1875-4182-8DEE-9F6393011D2C@net.in.tum.de> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 22:50:55 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0B4E9314-9F6A-4AE6-8B1F-B41F9A5264B1@mhcomputing.net> References: <6DC6DE50-F94F-419C-98DF-3AD8DCD4F69D@net.in.tum.de> <23D2CA18-1875-4182-8DEE-9F6393011D2C@net.in.tum.de> To: Paul Emmerich X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Performance regression in DPDK 1.8/2.0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 05:50:58 -0000 On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Paul Emmerich = wrote: > Let me know if you need any additional information. > I'd also be interested in the configuration that resulted in the 20% = speed- > up that was mentioned in the original mbuf patch Not sure if it's relevant or not, but there was another mail claiming = PCIe MSI-X wasn't necessarily working in DPDK 2.x. Not sure if that = could be causing slowdowns when there are drastic volumes of 64-byte = packets causing a lot of PCI activity. Also, you are mentioning some specific patches were involved... so I = have to ask if anybody tried git bisect yet or not. Maybe easier than = trying to guess at the answer. Matthew.=