From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kiselev99@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lf0-f65.google.com (mail-lf0-f65.google.com
 [209.85.215.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58492935
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:31:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-lf0-f65.google.com with SMTP id o124so13008678lfb.2
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:date:subject:message-id
 :to; bh=vTafZs9zkfAxYYwQKw/Tk+tiN4Qw/BxQuiDBlhPvFa0=;
 b=OqiCTAZGE0q0xoc9qlNvjahDhvXBftBOhJMMRWiCL8kpGzoHxPZi0wkwZvk8OpLsu5
 3G5CbkKOdghNJhp7RWMSCzHhves/SIzzDXfmh7dx1mBLGNqdXw9L4bYYZK+t0EaPHUNZ
 wUTazZdQbGmfNH7QSE9D9knUQ/f3sH7obSiaE2gyGvHq2IgF99+pKnwey0B85PgMEoXN
 XzJHp9DTGbxW3StkTHVExNOisZFW1vwhqjad78Eka+mYJE3ak0/ByX5DIrav3ZL5TL/F
 l4ppdnPRlHQUy6WMMtX05FHpnqksLwVLkUTAo7aC0vstB9mKCqkNOazVVOxoBAq1Osra
 4xTg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:date
 :subject:message-id:to;
 bh=vTafZs9zkfAxYYwQKw/Tk+tiN4Qw/BxQuiDBlhPvFa0=;
 b=G2tPv33lDtq/mvQws1BP5zhi0OGflGlfJ2Yb2DRGDOOOSMmQeAgbPeAkWcR++AWgQF
 Vf044QNpj8H8XqDFyacO2ZrEjnhz3Yewi0C6zCB2wKQ5MAzi3KgKn+XUWqiOpu3h3StC
 397Ko+DDOO23QcHv5RGYv0e94TAIv1gElFj7yv58KcG72+lKHJoCYyohWpLowuAK8xLn
 Joz90jxA2oAQNyNyCEfQk5FGxFC/ivXXdDBKLIp51onwNu2ueDQSwrV1XwXMMeOZ0Nz2
 H8OMHgwi3MVWuudTGuBmxyvX4bjs1VOuMoSzo05E3lg8KL14AIyFjZE5Fj2bVzSTPGQp
 XzUQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWMbB99umHCFT+Bh4FvXZzdGx9+XbDmLi5dn8yjtNDtGScvOU5XuWBobYoU8u9RvA==
X-Received: by 10.112.172.34 with SMTP id az2mr6938913lbc.121.1460651492362;
 Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.250.153.86] ([31.173.84.82])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xx7sm6758039lbb.19.2016.04.14.09.31.31
 for <users@dpdk.org> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
 Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alexander Kiselev <kiselev99@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:31:30 +0300
Message-Id: <9485D7B0-E2EA-4D23-BBD9-6D233BDF8E29@gmail.com>
To: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (13E233)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-users] Lcore impact
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: 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: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:31:32 -0000

Could someone give me any hints about what could cause permormance issues in=
 a situation where one lcore doing a lot of linux system calls (read/write o=
n socket) slow down the other lcore doing packet forwarding? In my test the f=
orwarding lcore doesn't share any memory structures with the other lcore tha=
t sends test data to socket. Both lcores pins to different processors cores.=
 So therotically they shouldn't have any impact on each other but they do, o=
nce one lcore starts sending data to socket the other lcore starts dropping p=
ackets. Why?