From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com (mail-pf0-f173.google.com
 [209.85.192.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32363B5
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 06:01:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pf0-f173.google.com with SMTP id e4so6279830pfg.1
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 21:01:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=0S4PJbLVUEAsW7T5O72NGTq3Xg/Le2oGr6kg22jp03o=;
 b=hROVCcig3bDQQR36U+dEw+DRA/PLy5y//aK6y0AntJE7Y6VQvuCFI3uGOvZu0JB6yV
 yQSHcKaCNM3t2MlPHjhkDKg9ruUhFJN943/pnGOn/tCkSdBdHf8PA8kL3v9vra28AleL
 93I8zzaKv4Bg2jsopnHFIn4xVhYbrTj8Ij4zhUGrYgwdY1JGY96mqBaMHiYWNq4Wr/I/
 OdOhEQ5Jx4kwURhELkm/gF71ujoJmJO6c4pYjfBbBjKy6VfmoUiQosdcO+9q9W9HKFeI
 wW//g4lOOPQpS3MiOagdAfqf11LVsmgpTQ6vBW/SOETBBaU5XI+YY73xnO232HSFEV/3
 fcOg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=0S4PJbLVUEAsW7T5O72NGTq3Xg/Le2oGr6kg22jp03o=;
 b=Wk1cv3Q6/pqfD0VeUcs/t6I3nHVPtsxag+DCUmTjg6VLV4sf6i7+pJIK0dAFuDXFm9
 3qNX1xa49Jdk2HqnYIF7ybLKJl1jdgIJ/pBtRx6LHzRmWkeTDzOHQXsp231Z6v0DuYNc
 I2rslfpflSPZOguesuciCiH6d52fpSo6ftuyknTRroOZTC5aHuDlmFdVNmnifr7k0EVJ
 3Ja8VNdxc/CjEnsbcNWJCPEu6IYxlE+UuSJBO70O9SWtAd66JgfhadESsLgD776t5EXQ
 nQMEwepbWJMkMU7ta+nE1Wx8K6JALVB3NzeTPNYypTdflpYVZNrv47a/CP4q4LOu3+5r
 G1bQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39noVhtX1of0S7SwgJJplaE52cS/hpnwLlqQkpzEKNllfmLqOv8ZNLum7v0LUQvT6w==
X-Received: by 10.84.136.75 with SMTP id 69mr9017977plk.172.1486702869559;
 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 21:01:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xeon-e3 (204-195-18-65.wavecable.com. [204.195.18.65])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z29sm1122415pgc.7.2017.02.09.21.01.09
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256);
 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 21:01:09 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:01:01 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Sakthivel Subramaniam <sakthivelpvs@gmail.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20170209210101.07a88c9f@xeon-e3>
In-Reply-To: <CANrG1jXoa_EnxgK-uCrsvQBxSZ80MV6syApV2oSh6a56x76HKw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANrG1jXoa_EnxgK-uCrsvQBxSZ80MV6syApV2oSh6a56x76HKw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Regarding rte_malloc and linux malloc
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 05:01:11 -0000

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:00:33 +0530
Sakthivel Subramaniam <sakthivelpvs@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> I have some basic doubt about DPDK memory allocation.
> 1. rte_malloc will allocate memory from hugepage memory ?

yes. but remember hugepage memory is limited

> 2. If we use normal malloc, this will be allocated from heap. will this
> allocation also useful for dpdk?

DPDK primary application can use it but you can't pass that memory
to a secondary DPDK process. Also you can't use malloc memory for things
that get DMA'd like packet buffers.

> 3. Or for better performance we have to use only rte_malloc?
The memory from rte_malloc will cause less TLB misses, but on a modern
processor for a small resident set size it probably makes no difference.