From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Shirley Avishour <shirley@imvisiontech.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] drops while transmitting to the kni using rte_kni_tx_burst()
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 17:49:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60be9923-501f-0611-698b-40730defbdf3@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACn717hLGKEsLc0gyw78nsnWQZ8uG0wW2bqOC8hJUjmByOmZrg@mail.gmail.com>
On 1/17/2017 12:34 PM, Shirley Avishour wrote:
> Hi,
> can the KNI_KTHREAD_RESCHEDULE_INTERVAL decrease to lower values than 5
> usecs?? is it effective at all?
You are right, it may not be since metric is usecs, and
usecs_to_jiffies() most probably will give same value for 5 and lower.
Removing that sleep completely (CONFIG_RTE_KNI_PREEMPT_DEFAULT=n) helps
a little.
> and what is the purpose of KNI_RX_LOOP_NUM? I am not sure I understand
> what it does and what should I do with it to improve the performance.
Increasing the loop number, also increases the work/sleep ratio, and
increasing the performance a little.
>
> thanks!
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Shirley Avishour
> <shirley@imvisiontech.com <mailto:shirley@imvisiontech.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> KNI_KTHREAD_RESCHEDULE_INTERVAL is currently set to 5usec. how
> should I tweak this value to get better performance?
> and can you explain the use of KNI_RX_LOOP_NUM and what can I
> possibly modify it to ?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Ferruh Yigit
> <ferruh.yigit@intel.com <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>> wrote:
>
> On 1/16/2017 2:47 PM, Shirley Avishour wrote:
> > Hi,
> > As I wrote the kernel thread runs on a dedicated lcore.
> > running top while my application is running I see kni_single and the cpu
> > usage is really low...
> > Is there any rate limitation for transmitting to the kernel interface
> > (since packets are being copied in the kernel).
>
> Yes, kind of, kernel thread sleeps periodically, with a value
> defined by
> KNI_KTHREAD_RESCHEDULE_INTERVAL. You can try tweaking this
> value, if you
> want thread do more work, less sleep J
>
> Also KNI_RX_LOOP_NUM can be updated for same purpose.
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > On 1/16/2017 12:20 PM, Shirley Avishour wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I have an application over dpdk which is consisted of
> the following threads
> > > each running on a separate core:
> > > 1) rx thread which listens on in a poll mode for traffic
> > > 2) 2 packet processing threads (for load balancing)
> > > 3) kni thread (which also runs on a separate core).
> >
> > This is kernel thread, right? Is it bind to any specific core?
> > Is it possible that this thread shares the core with 2nd
> processing
> > thread when enabled?
> >
> > >
> > > the rx thread receives packets and clones them and
> transmit a copy
> > to the
> > > kni and the other packet is sent to the packet
> processing unit
> > (hashing
> > > over 2 threads).
> > > the receive traffic rate is 100Mbps.
> > > When working with single packet processing thread I am
> able to get
> > all the
> > > 100Mbps towards the kni with no drops.
> > > but when I activate my application with 2 packet processing
> > threads I start
> > > facing drops towards the kni.
> > > the way I see it the only difference now is that I have
> another
> > threads
> > > which handles an mbuf and frees it once processing is
> completed.
> > > Can anyone assist with this case please?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-17 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-16 12:20 Shirley Avishour
2017-01-16 14:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-16 14:47 ` Shirley Avishour
2017-01-16 14:55 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-16 14:58 ` Shirley Avishour
2017-01-17 17:46 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-17 17:57 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-18 9:51 ` Shirley Avishour
2017-01-16 15:43 ` Shirley Avishour
2017-01-17 12:34 ` Shirley Avishour
2017-01-17 17:49 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2017-01-17 14:21 ` Jay Rolette
2017-01-20 19:48 ` Jason Kwon
2017-01-23 7:59 ` Shirley Avishour
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=60be9923-501f-0611-698b-40730defbdf3@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=shirley@imvisiontech.com \
/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).