From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua0-f181.google.com (mail-ua0-f181.google.com [209.85.217.181]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A42C2A62 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 15:21:37 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ua0-f181.google.com with SMTP id y9so104039312uae.2 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:21:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infinite-io.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0iePPiZw+wwrezZldL3vjAhNJ91muilGa8ZWiIR5414=; b=Srv+FRTgW4xuqB26o+YstaNkwivRdhjzDThOqIAyFCvLE+BSo+6IeKmwEnZFvysO9Z RE3ZQMs/S8oye32QPBE0YkCSF6Je1E942DXNYdMGaciLgQkh22WZ07VYG/5XizqqfFku WLJZNV75hwb5UscSgdn3g+QiOZ459ayGWeJAy2ZFKEX5wJmTSel0ueA6cDsYWNwVxDJT LeqWvJ2C0TUOejDFf8pRbQn3XGoAzCdBGYzFuoRVhmHLzLzzIhVr1Jkrl4hx1H3Mqs9j 6kVBfOo3S1pkewSRvf/hBi1hopPMKR+AI4BTU40Zdf5zqrKkJ6pyK+SZJsWLdui1rRn0 tmJw== 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=0iePPiZw+wwrezZldL3vjAhNJ91muilGa8ZWiIR5414=; b=RMDBMYctrKYRP96+IbDxUqmhNGBOOifbOr5pTMB0gYyjIPFhy1dHBx8Q1HT3KuQRWF BqfbXz7HKLw+tm0vxgkmDYczWGpakT8R2imAEmuTEiSupedGBqRLqTTglZTliWqfjCVs 59mQvYX4E2alrTbzA+HhiFR1ApF77fN/YLcEmYTvCaQnLC+LvxY0NITsolSmp/mMQ57f bDgMYVAZvjHlXbDtRUTCNYZUJXfBZSGRPaKpeeRqEqwUgFA9BX9tw0CRtvN2Ph3GqsZC LvfHLM01YYTgOeSYgnpWOO+Q3SOxskDfikARvH1oir+ljzRCGL0w+ha20mNxAW77BV9t wjDg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXImkoLe09EOiZhqNhJzykqZQvvqwf1mXoEYikk/2jV7VjDu+qPGPhQ7mMCDa9eIjQNnhVn5NBm9PQs96g== X-Received: by 10.176.76.68 with SMTP id d4mr7980353uag.105.1484662896818; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:21:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.104.76 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:21:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jay Rolette Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:21:36 -0600 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Shirley Avishour , DPDK 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: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:21:37 -0000 On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:55 AM, 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 > YMMV, but that is unlikely to be the problem. See this thread for why the code is misleading if you don't understand what the schedule_timeout() call is doing: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-June/018858.html Jay > > 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! > > > > > > > > >