From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F40BFA04AD for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 19:17:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD7EA1E548; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 19:17:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-oi1-f171.google.com (mail-oi1-f171.google.com [209.85.167.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11B91BEDF for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:21:37 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-oi1-f171.google.com with SMTP id 22so2219439oip.7 for ; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 01:21:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=O4Fjpur4lUohADmKMfOHaJ1MJqh4tpB63cDQ4nBRbAw=; b=Z8gQbPk/NjMwuu4Oz4KL2XVGAqbYaa5nuY/7i7Ios9BZMU/+led/mJn+BIgnjIwz5X WQPBnC9yyl6n+rk2AEg5cytJe5hLa5Btaj9hxZZpuD4P0csJdaCb31ieq1DxzCWDUjbl jLx5uRwVtdb/Ukf3uelGdhafUQ5n1IS3lDo7X3tzHiWOc9DlQqKdwNQ7+ARmsQ7EwMn4 BR9vb9/q0joJbBiJSJF7BJClV8FipEfTVH/r3ALsjSiuIStBtlAb6VJJSjitfF/WNbZR CFutrd1BuAl4/z6MJUI7xTNCQqYsl4xAHFQueDeXlGZX1MPluCf1j+n73dAm/222QJQl zM1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=O4Fjpur4lUohADmKMfOHaJ1MJqh4tpB63cDQ4nBRbAw=; b=Z+78pFXNMqdU9t4TwigDoKfyEG+USdX5WtzqPrvLb0sTqlO7ueuPc83lnGtQ5D5Mey NkJC5cymMECWNIV7FQJuvh9VEtwFXJ5xH7oG3cEvMWU/YqMXMOBt89nEWPl3cB4r3s4l VndQwc4GwO+uceQLCH2RRRUVQje7KkxzQXVjI5VHaJuap25GpuF2pHBpl6TqF/wFaNDM cVp7wUNq4YQhpSuIo/r0WFFvajIHNa0y/bJX170omKOTU0qkBiqrjH5kfkUEjRTIIGZc X6yczSNxWa5wbg5yP0dzRWQASSrZiukBxva2lpOhuXkleJagULztI6rgBUEiMqde1Lnl erwA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVFwsrui/R2LFZOa/pmDH5uuE9KwK8NgJSCs7IRr+M6H/GkYXZI WhCRgXhKSBM8rO8MhajT1yNl4kYivBTSNOA4ouxV3Ngo X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqylJizoFFPZJYTEQNdnnK2XwH58zWFSrS2kRdhcz9R72FhL/PWxOIDASHGfADbrs808mtcLg0xq+T3azgnsQ9g= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:4:: with SMTP id u4mr1444399oic.20.1573032096834; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 01:21:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Timur Bogdanov Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:21:25 +0300 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 19:17:40 +0100 Subject: [dpdk-users] The dpdk application performance degradation after moving to CentOs 7 X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Hi, I encountered with a performance degradation of my dpdk based application after moving from RedHat 6 to CentOs 7. Previously application was compiled with dpdk-2.2.0 library, worked on RedHat 6 and was capable to process up to 7 Gb/s on each port of Intel x520-sr2 NIC without packet drops. Now application is compiled with dpdk-17.11.6 library (the application architecture itself have not been changed), works on CentOs 7 ( 3.10.0-957.el7.x86_64) and NIC drops incoming packets (imissed) if input traffic on each port is more than 6 Gb/s. (handlers process packets more slowly I guess ) So, hardware, input traffic, application itself has not been changed and on both Os's application uses isolated cores, but performance degraded. I found an article https://ivanvari.com/solving-poor-performance-on-rhel-and-centos-7/ and changed tuned profile from latency-performance (used on RedHat 6) to network-latency but it didn't helped a lot. Also I tried to turn off some security patches related to spectre/meltdown according to article https://access.redhat.com/articles/3311301 but it also didn't helped. Is it possible to eliminate this performance degradation somehow or only one possible solution is to use faster CPU's and change application architecture (adding more handlers per port)? /Regards, Timur