From: Srikanth Akula <srikanth044@gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Max throughput Using QOS Scheduler
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 17:29:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8eA5k0=A1N8gTGQ1zGvUsRoLvy3PCmxBHv27xE9=wxVFbR8A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+8eA5=ErEWHtQJmy6gePFghdS8Li-OP3dfktiOvO6eEkEtGCg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all,
Can anybody answer my queries ?
thanks & Regards,
Srikanth
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Srikanth Akula <srikanth044@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello All ,
>
> I am currently trying to implement QOS scheduler using DPDK 1.6 . I have
> configured 1 subport , 4096 pipes for the sub port and 4 TC's and 4 Queues .
>
> Currently i am trying to send packets destined to single Queue of the
> available 16 queues of one of the pipe .
>
> Could some body explain what could be the throughput we can achieve using
> this scheme. The reason for asking this is , i could sense different
> behavior each time when i send traffic destined to different destination
> Queues .
>
> for example :
>
> 1. << Only one stream>>> Stream destined Q0 of TC0 ..
>
>
> 2. << 4 streams >>>> 1st Stream destined for Q3 of Tc3 ...
> 2nd stream destined for Q2 of Tc2
> 3rd stream destined for Q1 of TC1
> 4th Stream destined for Q0 of TC0
>
> Is there any difference between scheduler behavior for above two
> scenarios while enqueing and de-queueing ??
>
> Queue size is 64 , and number of packets enqueud and dequeued is 64 as
> well.
> And what is the improvements i would gain if i move to DPDK 1.7 w.r.t QOS ?
>
>
> Could you please clarify my queries ?
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Srikanth
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-05 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-30 16:09 Srikanth Akula
2014-11-05 1:29 ` Srikanth Akula [this message]
2014-11-06 20:37 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2014-11-07 2:21 ` Srikanth Akula
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='CA+8eA5k0=A1N8gTGQ1zGvUsRoLvy3PCmxBHv27xE9=wxVFbR8A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=srikanth044@gmail.com \
--cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.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).