From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Received: from mail-pd0-f170.google.com (mail-pd0-f170.google.com
 [209.85.192.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D165A52
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  9 Apr 2015 23:24:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by pdea3 with SMTP id a3so9403pde.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=C49x7TzZI3tlyfjd19omhM673HN84cpWHoDAHFR3J60=;
 b=YurA9l7P1ltSnsFtRcizzDVEweKWNTgOMwlbnWIPDeS7qhNmxzcuCRgaX14uSFhm0i
 ASeWorEYETycz0RBKnmC6ObCl39t1ZqabZJk3JPaVMsm0/I4Bz+Xqg0U0nTvf1I+6Ym0
 OC/Ji3Lbrmf6yh7WenlS4n47s/RMTuKxdJWTgjZpIJN1OZEL+KxZfORvcFQLeOMTE6w5
 Aah/iA3ODv0he6yKdWAzsKPC7i0/MTWUNUPh4Rp2xQF+oyfBUpZ6TJBJmby1MZ1++HrD
 5zQOgU0qmOjLVrHj/ZS85AhB3v7nrUgffEYVYgR/9P/AHbwt++RwkZtvEoeDZdihSuK+
 8M7g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl5ynMtJg5s+cfM/3HCblqGxFjdd5g9HYT04vVmEt+8tu1axhjF8mNBmiXKC0S9e1Vu3+Zn
X-Received: by 10.68.172.131 with SMTP id bc3mr1136304pbc.107.1428614672430;
 Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from urahara (static-50-53-82-155.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net.
 [50.53.82.155])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qh9sm15279539pbc.24.2015.04.09.14.24.31
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:24:37 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Aaron Campbell <aaron@arbor.net>
Message-ID: <20150409142437.203fed44@urahara>
In-Reply-To: <16D8F22D-333F-499F-8B5A-4839E582054D@arbor.net>
References: <5D6C8629-393C-4195-8063-8168E206335B@arbor.net>
 <CAOaVG153Z4=fVwFxJ__KbVj1WCmWVHk_EiuoQG5_9bVmpiWvFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <16D8F22D-333F-499F-8B5A-4839E582054D@arbor.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Polling too often at lower packet rates?
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 21:24:37 -0000

On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 15:26:23 -0300
Aaron Campbell <aaron@arbor.net> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>=20
> Thanks, that was an informative talk.  In this case, are you referring to=
 your comments about the thermal budget?
>=20
> That=E2=80=99s definitely interesting, but there must be more to it than =
that.  Again, if I loop over all 6 ports (i.e., continue to keep the CPU bu=
sy), it works around the problem.
>=20
> I agree that adaptive polling makes sense and will look into it.  But wil=
l still take any further ideas on what is going on here.
>=20
> -Aaron

Your excess polling consumes PCI bandwidth which is a fixed resource.