From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <peichao85@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lb0-x22b.google.com (mail-lb0-x22b.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22b])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1812F4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 04:48:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-lb0-f171.google.com with SMTP id c11so6561080lbj.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:49:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
 bh=tHWjDpkBfPGvfZd6Hutx4Dj35riAw5B+dqrV/np/KGw=;
 b=j18twnVF31EF7X/c0mmYDRYTboFg642QxunnHdfih7oBxNffIHuRNn4cjK4/mstN5p
 LspDpZ2Avmeuhh41TjdRKb6bNdsSPwWDvq4+yceeIWcHnoe3R8nVKJHLQPRVPHaSbBX5
 YM/aDnqYA+af9jHNWutdq/cnr/bFyXuyVpKlMlRny63H/eNKFgagW0HW/s8MKfhkU/s5
 0w9diBHgZ2K/a979SRHGp2fGmigdhVnmjFB/oacM1oIoR0Vz3VpfK66pA1XolLkxgW6d
 m+VEYC4DA+WQN+TAHWbhA0xZ5b6oXEEK7UOMpekHJa1j6Jq13Twy0FM3pSGLnHYW7SF7
 p/fQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.188.135 with SMTP id ga7mr18037510lbc.5.1390362579076;
 Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:49:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.143.231 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:49:39 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:49:39 +0800
Message-ID: <CAJkE24LBp8qC9MxX4cx7v7PrUHXSoOAzOX5p23XuG-MnBc4gDA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chao Pei <peichao85@gmail.com>
To: dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-dev]  KNI with multiple rxq/freeqs
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: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 03:48:23 -0000

Hi,
    Currently we are using run-to-complete model with multiple workers in
our project. there is also a KNI running with a fixed ip address. However,
a packet with a destination IP of the KNI may go to any worker that owns a
rxq of the physical NIC(without Flow Director). So all the workers have to
enqueue the packets to the same rxq of the KNI. Which may cause a
performance issue.
    I think it's necessary to have multiple rxq/freeqs for KNI, so that
each worker can have its own rxq/freeq. As for txq/allocq, it does not have
the issue I mentioned above.