From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x22a.google.com (mail-la0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8085A1F3 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:47:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ep20so24879lab.29 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:48:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=n0kiFxOjtfXIfpeoFqR0t4PAGGNux3RSqUCbHskKSp4=; b=UQP4Sa3u836i0MoEYwMqWHEZ0khUlcrgzizKJDVFpXqOLeXFsbdbUIlMg8xyAmonxU skAlZL/OByfyoXBMvikiQSVqkqGLEVEdk+QpURRI5RYlmtPZf32aZD9C106tBZkxFapI nKf7eupn2Lwny2DOM2mliMwBLwdqANsoiI+alDzAc86+fPC3fOggADgA60wTLkhEfdxP 9PxoxbP7gFIy0CBABkvU0CMpD6cVqbdYes2w2WJycy0JvZjgL+FK8VUl9UQorp1qnaxO Np9n1mwWYkUb/KizOFg7PHVnG0KAXh8tgabjFuYFyBVKHcdRg17XvKE5yj2yoMqFViz4 mtXw== X-Received: by 10.112.57.49 with SMTP id f17mr5238550lbq.26.1379659685111; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.15.100] ([91.246.87.40]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w10sm5416707lbv.6.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <523BEFA3.4070209@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 10:48:03 +0400 From: Dmitry Vyal User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Sanford References: <523AACC9.8010304@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] How to fight forwarding performance regression on large mempool 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: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 06:47:26 -0000 On 09/19/2013 11:39 PM, Robert Sanford wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > The biggest drop-off seems to be from size 128K to 256K. Are you using > 1GB huge pages already (rather than 2MB)? > > I would think that it would not use over 1GB until you ask for 512K > mbufs or more. > Hi Robert, Yes, I've been using 1GB pages for a while. My L3 cache is 20MB and mbufs are 2240 bytes of size. So something strange indeed happens then we move from ~200MB to ~400MB. Any ideas? Regards, Dmitry