Lcores would be in pinned/isolated threads.

At the level data interacts with dpdk it's batched.  There can be multiple
batches.   Basically just multiple vectors of data already in
structured/aligned for what dpdk wants.

The SPSC queues are on the Rust side, not dpdk  provided.

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 2:50 PM Stephen Hemminger <
stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 14:21:55 -0800
> Chris Ochs <chris@ochsnet.com> wrote:
>
> > Trying to get a handle on the best way to integrate with my existing
> > architecture.
> >
> > My main application is in Rust and it's a partitioned/batching flow. It's
> > an end server. I basically send type erased streams between partitions
> > using SPSC queues. Work scheduling is separate.  Workers basically do
> work
> > stealing of partitions.  The important part is messaging is tied to
> > partitions not threads.
> >
> > So what I think might work best here is I assign a partition per lcore. I
> > already have a design where partitions can be designated as network
> > partitions, and my regular workers can then ignore these partitions.
> With
> > dpdk specific workers taking over.  I designed the architecture for use
> > with user space networking generally from the start.
> >
> > A partition in a networking flow consumes streams from other partitions
> > like normal. In a dpdk flow what I think this looks like is for each
> stream
> > call into C to transmit.  Streams would be written mbuf aligned so I
> think
> > this is just a single memcpy per stream into dpdk buffers.  And then a
> > single call to receive.
> >
> > Does anything stand out here as problematic?  I read the known issues
> > section and nothing there stood out as  problematic.
>
> Are your lcore's pinned and isolated?
> Is your API per packet or batch?
> Are these DPDK ring buffers or some other queuing mechanism?
>
>
>