From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <maverickjin88@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-it1-f172.google.com (mail-it1-f172.google.com
 [209.85.166.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCB322B94
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 01:36:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it1-f172.google.com with SMTP id e74-v6so5701587ita.2
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Sat, 27 Oct 2018 16:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
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=/yq2aP7D5oaGFCsdZNQw59JzNrJLseoyzwGZdojgHAQ=;
 b=Nvn5mKzIWsLCaUMhj1Mve2TxhcAfCf+aFcm10zukooDb4YcmJCuw2xIIY+BZ3BEHTy
 sPSvLL+W3NnNUUv6BFMev4H7Uc1oconh154tMoD0Soc3xOkz3UycxKH8B55JgM21tXW1
 hJObPFnkiYJAo0NRBZNjNYQV8v1idk6h2/siSOcg/+SHokUmtiDFgDQTwq8Z/v4UGhzr
 9RusxbKBcfBfqA8AqTmNd3a0CnNopBXUqjBt48LUd43ZSwgIL222GRF0QIZ9TZyztjEJ
 rtDw6o/0i9CJn+RLM1JRzG8OB4ZPUEZWeVbALfwNdGb/QrOt289PM6ehZsQekMCwgc3X
 0GVQ==
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=/yq2aP7D5oaGFCsdZNQw59JzNrJLseoyzwGZdojgHAQ=;
 b=Fxt4wwj3gjjJ94YetagjrrJXfRagJkhO8Q4VJJ2Viz39uw6I0bxxGy0jWWQa5zkKyQ
 x+18Aw0r/Fgs1n+XHTo5mIwYDZIjn7VsyjWcvKndjrLjA9r+R21JgJQyf6M3oEglYe9c
 qCPJvea1RT7JOWWqSrB7UrvYuFfSSrBlrVZEepVK36QsAsCHu+b4k9R454Rk/VUcE2W0
 Lk7wbFJr4t899w1N8WMS568f4UL4ACkaq/K+XyoErrwtSZTj9tDQvEDNlcGXBEta4t6H
 Xh6XXPZ/uKDQHDlfLeTPRDC57nkem0bEPhhA7Yh2t/o38IobnrrLbeEBRnwoexoXM0WE
 N2EA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJnYnxJHxYCoM1Xuy3AOY1H8g/GIitj75NXCYfW6x/Sil2r3zL3
 GDYz2iDB1kbE5lQ8p/haQNYqXqqqxg0Bt/H8dWyjTxA3
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5ft33+ABV1PjRnkgwOoyYjbUavI3fxubabEHrs3kxSwJou0S3AO2WetFSnT0uf6kWKtmf9sZtch+IWlAWW+lkE=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:958a:: with SMTP id
 m132-v6mr7108909itd.106.1540683386882; 
 Sat, 27 Oct 2018 16:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Sungho Hong <maverickjin88@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 16:36:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK8vx=hQ7YbbVhtXa-FveT7QXmmbJMYEkzzsSENDK0HSa9HiDQ@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] Why DPDK latency is high when sending message in
	interval?
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: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 23:36:29 -0000

Hello DPDK experts,

I'am testing the performance of DPDK not on high speed polling
but sending each packet with 100 microsecond interval.

As same as the POSIX, DPDK performance degrades into 90 ~ 100 microsecond
round-trip latency per  4KB message.

Is there a way to improve the performance, when I am expecting to send the
packet on 100 microsecond interval?

And is there an explanation of the slowdown of DPDK when I am sending the
packet on 100 microsecond interval?

Any insights on this issue will be highly appreciated..
Thanks