From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com [209.85.212.174]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 684362F4 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:36:56 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id g10so6145123wiw.13 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:38:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+tMDf2WXiDuIEcimtfFLOjAlK+iowEft9cLlif7cC4s=; b=gVwdNRBqWDpecPKlB1QnOoghRttu/wksY6loxKrUGMYvQRG6NADoE3PSPYtGH4ijiN Ogdg1aHI9ACtSnk2TRTw9hNskrebndD1rgS7tXUiqHjE1/E23LXMtZA4zmjs7RnePnNj PisgVVMN23kAorOZtWS1u4b+SMbewL1F75Lll21+rAnIeOCrcXizg2NfwBIAH57jMGmR k8l3mBoZ3K4vETBQWOtN3e7FfbdOwJZQRWsATXPVgofXlnhpypjbxUviF5n0KNzrLa7e +xLFqR4qgzv0ylFt7Tyn/Eo99kQaZJLw5jme2WbjmqCdsRaLfrqohjl1KuIioDfkT63V ZmFw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlH+Hp49NNDPAoLNUDdonikObCTqhPcEexkjrSd7aSehtAMb3Zg0YlvwWBWlhtmXTINcmHm MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.86.9 with SMTP id l9mr4998228wiz.20.1390423092692; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:38:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.32.131 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:38:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:38:12 -0500 Message-ID: From: Robert Sanford To: Michael Quicquaro Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , mayhan@mayhan.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx-errors with testpmd (only 75% line rate) X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 20:36:56 -0000 Hi Michael, > What can I do to trace down this problem? May I suggest that you try to be more selective in the core masks on the command line. The test app may choose some cores from "other" CPU sockets. Only enable cores of the one socket to which the NIC is attached. > It seems very similar to a > thread on this list back in May titled "Best example for showing > throughput?" where no resolution was ever mentioned in the thread. After re-reading *that* thread, it appears that their problem may have been trying to achieve ~40 Gbits/s of bandwidth (2 ports x 10 Gb Rx + 2 ports x 10 Gb Tx), plus overhead, over a typical dual-port NIC whose total bus bandwidth is a maximum of 32 Gbits/s (PCI express 2.1 x8). -- Regards, Robert