From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lavanya.jose@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-oi0-f51.google.com (mail-oi0-f51.google.com
 [209.85.218.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB02256B7;
 Sat, 23 Jul 2016 22:21:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f51.google.com with SMTP id j185so206045300oih.0;
 Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=36b9mMpfk3SjmKtY2XOJR16F+rcNfEYOlivbd6QfGfg=;
 b=XHNh+tGmbkJZOBth8OwlSIQBzSElyKeSM+tBcwPCjKu5gkX/bplE3RW5auL++q9D6g
 YFo5ywmCY6oImBQXT3srLVfMx4hcnAgRdcLGyD6VansXXwVDomCYbH/7JRPPqA2Db49i
 zc8YvgSywE0dRzhFABQY3/TuSZMhl6E7+mMRkXigU0qzfb9Yvlm1lCMWN4bsrYAXpBqt
 dnCJqojt3hLO8gxpkfiYcvlKMoXn02poJu7XdWjVe7wRjOxqW2gcPIEnxDEB4ZLzeubQ
 BnfZCP348NYIoRJK+6LsFWAH0X86Yf3QzcpePhuhbsmVVLAl6hAgY9juV2i+MPF0OQqY
 k1Lw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=36b9mMpfk3SjmKtY2XOJR16F+rcNfEYOlivbd6QfGfg=;
 b=heGa916GW2hyrLddGcpltn06gjwuLAff4/RAjlvtJwFulOT14nBftF7fRPGJULpI4X
 hbQIfqlzesXxjuXpruZMqbfHGnBWxWraZ19N8nm8KE7euM3jTVTwbKDSwK8nxpzRXPMw
 TKm9pXzOZUb1dO14aDWTQQhDVG1CUPFldNt1RZRlEVE1QPvH2F0/zLTRBEF+WL6hi4GA
 RbnOsFBIKlsUVR6LJle2zVSkzdCTieKmVWF+iwjH04ayYXtn5EPAq7h1AqoYrNJGZM4x
 JTSsswFjq3QugIAlyVsGfJQwmv0LxQUToYkYg3Dzt16LfUlGDTsdbYPLmRKUlHtVS7gB
 QbUQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvRuKAYbXhEEFA9QOek00eFdX8GU8FqkH5k+PHfArmB5Y6PxACHUi2eBNOuabf8N2ypkJZAM7FR0G9/UA==
X-Received: by 10.157.11.51 with SMTP id a48mr5446478ota.128.1469305300717;
 Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:21:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.202.244.211 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:21:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lavanya Jose <lavanya.jose@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:21:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CADi0TLcbK28O3cf0B7qmMXc-jY0Wbjfy1j+aGt5PJ7e3fzMKaA@mail.gmail.com>
To: users@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-dev] Configuring NIC Tx arbiters in VMDK off, DCB off mode
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 20:21:42 -0000

Hi everyone,

I found a snippet
<https://github.com/snabbco/snabb/blob/master/src/apps/intel/intel10g.lua#L983>
of
code from a userspace driver that lets you configure weights for the
hardware NIC tx queues by configuring the RTTDT1C register in Intel 82599.
It looks like this is typically used for rate limiting VM traffic, with the
NIC in VMDQ mode. I was wondering whether I can do this without setting up
the NIC in VMDQ or DCB mode?

I am directly enqueuing CustomProto/UDP/IP/Ethernet packets from a single
process (two threads) on to specific hardware queues (without an
intermediate DPDK QOS/ Hierarchical Scheduler layer) and updating the
hardware queue rates, so the priority/ hardware rate limiting are the only
features I need (not VMDQ, DCB). Can I go about just changing the weights
as in the code above with VMDQ and DCB turned off?

Some initial experiments I did suggest that setting just the RTTDT1C
register for queues doesn't make any difference to the relative throughput
of the queues..

Thanks,
Lavanya