From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F0E333 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 13:06:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Jul 2014 04:01:27 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,581,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="555760778" Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Jul 2014 04:07:05 -0700 Received: from irsmsx152.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.66) by IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:06:26 +0100 Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.76]) by IRSMSX152.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.25]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:06:26 +0100 From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: Matt Laswell Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Ability to/impact of running with smaller page sizes Thread-Index: AQHPlLTqiUch75GSxUqMMlKLi20/B5uKP7uAgACa2oCAADGEsA== Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:06:25 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213355C8@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20140630234229.GA19646@plxv1142.pdx.intel.com> <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D3D561@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D3D561@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Ability to/impact of running with smaller page sizes 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, 01 Jul 2014 11:06:51 -0000 Hi, > Hi Matt, >=20 > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 05:43:39PM -0500, Matt Laswell wrote: > > Hey Folks, > > > > In my application, I'm seeing some design considerations in a project > > I'm working on that push me towards the use of smaller memory page > > sizes. I'm curious - is it possible in practical terms to run DPDK wit= hout hugepages? >=20 > > If so, does anybody have any practical experience (or a > > back-of-the-envelop estimate) of how badly such a configuration would > > hurt performance? For sake of argument, assume that virtually all of > > the memory being used is in pre-allocated mempools (e.g lots of > > rte_mempool_create(), very little rte_malloc(). > > >=20 > There is an case to run DPDK without hugepages in DPDK source codes, whic= h is DPDK supports Xen Dom0. for this, we developed a > dom0_mm driver. > Except for Xen Dom0, it is impossible to run DPDK without hugepages witho= ut any changes at memory initialization phase, but current > rte_memzone_reserve_bounded() and > rte_mempool_xmem_create() implemention have already support non-hugepage= usage in DPDK. >=20 On linux testpmd can run with mempool on 4K pages (though RX/TX HW rings ar= e still on hugepages). To try it add "--mp-anon" to your testpmd command-line. Also to get a more 'real' picture you can disable MP caching: "--mbcache=3D= 0". =20 Konstantin