From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F291A04E7; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:43:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6F1C83A; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:43:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76270C822 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:43:40 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1604479418; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=I0NzuXgwTezlFwbtcn5pWrHrxRuXsUDWRYAcXU6ejsA=; b=WEtqduxMitsQSGZKxuxEFyNhakRheEsjMXv2v28s3vEoOv+vHf0zc+9/VYBUyXFF87aW5p m/CC49gCReb1uhiG2SFY6GbuCF54ZTIbTn8TzRFTh/23k/Af9hyO2f298WthS451o4MkSr CV/8r1dJvuqtHZPCWhk8lVl9YKxSMuU= Received: from mail-vs1-f69.google.com (mail-vs1-f69.google.com [209.85.217.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-117-m8A4LtJdNPKmZ1ZLgFIFfA-1; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 03:43:37 -0500 X-MC-Unique: m8A4LtJdNPKmZ1ZLgFIFfA-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f69.google.com with SMTP id c14so7405470vso.9 for ; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:43:37 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I0NzuXgwTezlFwbtcn5pWrHrxRuXsUDWRYAcXU6ejsA=; b=EDcBbfLXlAlwCJZSo1Z1L5IhOt/6NUjAjnAbFGlveVg7wIhBXSWwoGuvQplbWp/Nj6 vi7nckxbUckhamepKB7U57y17eMeCG1tBvQuXrtjR0BMqdj1t+tB6EkmsbRr0WGCxCHV SFVr5T2t1xZb5PJJpY0QBJz8xJTDYAnUtO2329C+U2DYVQGaFrjRBhTtRl7OGjzHBYUF 4ru15kjeDiOwSNjKQceTU2RGg4H68psoO+Zv/1yIvjPB/KKLri9X+dawt7NP3NJ/6Kl8 fT97tcN96AkHVx2x/b0cXS1qsGnhIhsA3xIkAyt1Hd+m8DgFyWE9/vQEZ61AnmKZ+hiq B5xg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532YhXJHoCim+y/rzdshneKmqvXapNL0jsD4teqhbAdIleSyNO3c fvi0eXadZD3RLDCKTZJEwxwBfl0ljuNn7knviEfX/2vX8AuVa/bvMXOjCd02+NUJGVsqqXP9i7I SS9qebJZOYn04uAPD+uU= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fd46:: with SMTP id g6mr7771444vsr.27.1604479416590; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:43:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxfJ/z8QaMMxe+xKy7uIyXTn37XZqzi75a+GqXz1x8HyyLmJHqxvDDQ8zikA86YPw4K0hyH2sf/fJrUgOT4c2M= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fd46:: with SMTP id g6mr7771441vsr.27.1604479416451; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:43:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201104072810.105498-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:43:25 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Rong, Leyi" Cc: "Zhang, Qi Z" , dev Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/l3fwd: enable multiple Tx queues on a lcore 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 9:34 AM Rong, Leyi wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Marchand > > Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 4:14 PM > > To: Rong, Leyi > > Cc: Zhang, Qi Z ; dev > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] examples/l3fwd: enable multiple Tx queues on a lcore > > > > If I count well, this is the v3 of the patch. > > Please version your patches. > > The previous versions are set to superseded. As nothing changes with content > on those versions, can start from this version? The commitlog changes even if the code itself did not change, so this is a different patch. Different patches mean different versions. This shows that some work happened since the v1 submission. > As there always has thoughput limit for per queue, on some performance test case by using l3fwd, > the result will limited by the per queue thoughput limit. With multiple Tx queue enabled, the per > queue thoughput limit can be eliminated if the CPU core is not the bottleneck. Ah interesting. Which nic has such limitations? How much of an improvement can be expected from this? -- David Marchand