From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-f177.google.com (mail-ot0-f177.google.com [74.125.82.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166392A5B for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:43:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ot0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 65so46121978otq.2 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 07:43:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=imvisiontech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mKi5mweuEATiZ37kc08GivxKqXu5B2itkiImKXb9T+c=; b=SRjkAncp5sCzWWbJSpm6VTY9lDTg1U2khpQrA1c2ZPP2ULChjVqNS2QNm7UnSpkZTz cL9KZ9Qi8cH6Rn3B5rNfyrq4neV9LOViXrU8HKN1+9GOAs3hXPI0cawGZQTWi1Ff+jXM uTN1qCjXYBUDBHujopR8HC9zb+c+pI09Jr44g8s+EJ6NAd1h5vDWLYxW62E+HKu9uZ0C +USRQqpRTCIreeqYq50mlDFE40UehIVJzKAmcWCrDOg0RsyBNE5XyWj+TLAZYYB0tmf2 YixcDCJJsff4z77+t3tglDKMpnSvVtUqJ+U8rpNkbSIpKdg7AKEAHk+DuPYp0z3WWozS YWDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mKi5mweuEATiZ37kc08GivxKqXu5B2itkiImKXb9T+c=; b=eiiiJnoRc1HWhqLaSqUr3TXVzNXIH6En+/pHuwNbZ1tk09WRqgTmI5sj+cFn7ESasN ImNiGjdfSziXl5Uj67ihxjV7Brf+CnToJJECMVbBEY8w9EDrfuj2YvZuvyYR7BwpiS7R qnX8dVrMOrjV8Za+pieXlvnkzXgRL4jSgmpCRkw93bke22HMBsC+lipdzhGt0lQmBuJ0 p49magBP97DOSK1Y3pi3X2o0ZlhaLbPDqLbSxyfZPlS0ZeGKZSaYo7nUlY2yZlczI2f4 4uQkkoH9930FnUSzvHIC/k2ElVRorVOnjPOv4cig3q+34lXjXiHZyDNTHiFv5f7AobaR t+lA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKk1anagotxtbtB5kTStkrvQw9t14QWkeOP7ajqVahGAr2hx8Mt1Rl8frLbaSF9rVaq9LOj4/Lw+twrYw== X-Received: by 10.157.11.13 with SMTP id a13mr18070005ota.82.1484581430398; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 07:43:50 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.50.70 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 07:43:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Shirley Avishour Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 17:43:49 +0200 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] drops while transmitting to the kni using rte_kni_tx_burst() X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:43:51 -0000 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 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 > > 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! > > > > > > > > >