From: Olivier Deme <odeme@druidsoftware.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: [dpdk-dev] rte_kni_rx_burst issues
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:59:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EC75CF.20102@druidsoftware.com> (raw)
All,
I know that an issue was already raised with regards to the efficiency
of rte_kni_rx_burst but I think that there is more to it than previously
discussed.
As previously pointed out rte_kni_rx_burst invokes kni_allocate_mbufs
every single time.
In turn, it looks like kni_allocate_mbufs allocates 32 mbufs
(MAX_MBUF_BURST_NUM) and attempt to enqueue these to the alloc_q.
If alloc_q is full (1024 buffers: KNI_FIFO_COUNT_MAX),
kni_allocate_mbufs frees all buffers that couldn't be enqueued.
Further to the fact that this is very inefficient, it looks like
invoking rte_kni_rx_burst in a loop is guaranteed to fill the alloc_q to
its maximum capacity (1024) unless packets are read from the kernel
faster than they are enqueued by rte_kni_rx_burst.
In my application, I hit the "Out of memory" error in kni_allocate_mbufs
almost straight away because there is very little egress traffic from
the kernel and my memory pool wasn't big enough to cater for the kni
thread and other dpdk queues.
I would think the kni_allocate_mbufs should take a "buffer_count"
parameter which is the number of desired mbufs to allocate and add to
the alloc_q.
With this, rte_kni_rx_burst would be able to request allocating as many
mbufs that are dequeued from the tx_q, so that the total number of
buffers across alloc_q and tx_q remains constant.
I also noticed that none of these functions are declared inline.
This is not great as the thread that forwards packets between a NIC and
the kernel may also be the same thread that forwards packets between 2
NICs.
As such it would be better to avoid too many function calls to forward
packets between NICs and kernel.
Kind Regards,
Olivier.
reply other threads:[~2015-02-24 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54EC75CF.20102@druidsoftware.com \
--to=odeme@druidsoftware.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).