From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Sungho Hong <maverickjin88@gmail.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Ideal design to use ip-fragmentation using multiple lcores
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:18:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181031081824.373fb415@xeon-e3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8vx=gepAc=2JK_jDgEhjLSEXSw6bnMfZwRvU8mg4mzc0VvLg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 18:55:02 -0700
Sungho Hong <maverickjin88@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello DPDK experts,
>
> I have a question of how to ideally use ip fragmentation and assemble using
> N number of logical cores each associated with tx&rx queues.
>
> Should the ip fragmentation table be single received by a single rx-queue?
>
> Because I am not sure whether I will receive all the fragmented messages
> correctly when I try to receive and combine the packets using multiple
> rx-queues with multiple logical cores.
>
> I have currently build an example that only uses one rx-queue with multiple
> tx-queues and assemble the fragmented messages with a single frag-table.
> But I am not sure how to scale this..
I am not sure what you are asking.
The usual model of DPDK programs is to use RSS to spread receive packets
across multiple RX queues, and use a thread per RX queue to poll.
When IP packets are fragmented the IP header is on each packet and the
UDP header is only on the first packet. RSS can be configured to include
the UDP port (or not). If RSS is applied to the UDP port as well (L3+L4)
then the fragmented packets will arrive on potentially different queues.
If you configure RSS for L3 only hashing, then the fragmented packet
will arrive on the same queue for all fragments. The downside of L3 only
hashing is that if you are doing a workload or benchmark with only
a single address pair, then all packets will be on one queue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-31 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-31 1:55 Sungho Hong
2018-10-31 15:18 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2018-10-31 17:17 ` Sungho Hong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181031081824.373fb415@xeon-e3 \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=maverickjin88@gmail.com \
--cc=users@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).