From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <baptistewicht@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-io1-f54.google.com (mail-io1-f54.google.com
 [209.85.166.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9071B5C6
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:48:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-io1-f54.google.com with SMTP id g8so13520157iop.10
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 02:48:35 -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=nW/nXDSkXZTxCpYQ+vWq47ugVt62h48mj7rIubrr5b8=;
 b=NupHWqOju+pA0W52bWj8vbf/V4zwtDiFHD6s9712+yYohQBra5HpIuAfZANBxY+AUD
 Eo4PZVPDyF/om0biHrVcqPjPVLW5Op1X4mpjCnMUMu9RaMJ4lryzRA2ZvkHh4pM1Z77E
 o48khOhhj0tkFBWa+lpEH90VmtKwqLLGdDicITJrTSkWYkXhsGJxAFi8Lu7iRf6pw1le
 x9UrNiLTbcIbe8GxUzBInJ4/8+cKm/LnQgi3RfFaIKJMSFAlb7d+//81XQ90aPBuk/TY
 4Za1J+wccYUAk7ZRlv8E2baHbKsT9NFqgLAYCQjNmsDn1GCJpfDii44zELErUE5z+isT
 gh5g==
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=nW/nXDSkXZTxCpYQ+vWq47ugVt62h48mj7rIubrr5b8=;
 b=A+aJ6JroV/qW8IY98G6jwBBIBiwNrYtpeXNgLwlO0TT6jax0Ruwhauoa2NMPqzziVf
 FLoDB01eaHpDO0OwGHdEzSp0AdYdUkwSptf5CdE97IywEHKIBF4hwrnqtc1J8teTPEdv
 flFrIiZFjHGEhZCSvlNeI7+05Ts5//NmuI1dQQWw/XMPTVjS3mVbu3qP6VsE1hc44/lL
 3/5t9EHKbO54nngyo4amGKqEtAuZW9/gAwB5O1XOfvfXIjvQVohhd4YA51mOQLj9FHgT
 QqH61pxAtwRHeAP52om6UIR00XxfvUbMQeTUG0UcMgQX4+1vJpB5hOas79j1JLnI05rA
 o8TA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbyae6L42kMPdZ74kmS+jrsryPkaKPd4JfTFyZ1xFK++OlSG85B
 U8Osep2OCmkNzJPBml1cuGFpJ1Qhdnr7iMDjqJ/68w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Wk2c7jXLBfF7huxtYTskdiNUQTc/MGjjXad25iZUzZwPCm9M3d2YG8HuLIiDR5xvC5BPgiKpZYtDo7uWHAzdM=
X-Received: by 2002:a5e:de0c:: with SMTP id e12mr19606331iok.191.1543229314507; 
 Mon, 26 Nov 2018 02:48:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Baptiste Wicht <baptistewicht@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:48:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CAG1Vf3PmZ41fHjZi5fkxgbuoZSJ1QU3iEo+DYWzpG+TVvysTvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: users@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-users] Reduce latency of DPDK RX Interrupts
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:48:35 -0000

Hi,

In order to reduce latency in a project, I'm trying to use RX interrupts
instead of busy-polling with sleep in between. It works well, but I would
like to reduce the latency even further.

I have two questions regarding the use of RX interrupts:

1) Do I have to enable/disable interrupts on the queue around the
rte_epoll_wait call? Currently, I'm doing
enable/rte_epoll_wait/disable/recv on each wait. Wouldn't it be possible to
enable once and never disable the interrupts?
2) Is there any configuration option I could play with to try to reduce the
latency further?

Thanks a lot for your help

-- 
Dr. Baptiste Wicht
My personal website - http://baptiste-wicht.com