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 399A9293B
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 22:37:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it1-f172.google.com with SMTP id i76-v6so3259623ita.3
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 13:37:58 -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=QkL44aUsLNIiyLOLNlQEe8PEYV1Y8UMyFFDmKIzM3Q8=;
 b=DTRVL+H1du6NFWLh/jrOIqdk0FHINhUe4rvqkSAal+vApXbr2fgUvUBjJ6pur4/zEh
 URSKX5Rfjhwi0+zZFosf3w82hHtoRxlZcI/D+rWQLivTtASMwAmJqTWESuyema3BFpz/
 eMxpCbMmZiOZmKRDz3fpucgJ7z6D28G/2h8K7mTZtaIxJTqaZGlIXlzIQP8r0rU16stW
 iBqcB5MKjJOfNIxFPT13QblTo7jexsS7pPqFPYOTcR1n41SAymjwirWkIczxT9ltAx4G
 OE1FmWBh+IDBBzRFvy4F+oKJCuFInGs6NiLGRweyLiTJfHrOc8zKdg5FOoh86XzvBmdC
 l44g==
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=QkL44aUsLNIiyLOLNlQEe8PEYV1Y8UMyFFDmKIzM3Q8=;
 b=bhrm4krOSK2y7glXSoIREVuHnaSb7BKZTah89Tt9YJgiHP58BRQZsUQwJKDdCD9+kd
 J3dJ4+6k58h4zOjEIXj6/Fbwwma/WK68KBxcTzudbuy4QbaJMiCUtSCEkswDJf94SjoL
 PQRVHLSQCc5if9gg2tb1tnuKPsgtl6zGgPygcISqXmBknVo+nqg3EyL1zQhslb7k7AQj
 xHX7TmRGyq5kt7PaLpQe7cgoDmzbYi65REWlu59+RpuBFTDK21ObM0IGZt/TwEf1F22f
 fF/RLB7Fg2D+KiEM8R8SxBqaFiISYVP3R9IOHkRiNXjqAUb3D/GqCPuxSPmK4WBqVXHY
 GiiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJQnWYoVmGyrjk/btqmCsGdq932Ac/dlbML/ABJxIKw2TPmYrBf
 qsp1gx0tiFE33T1b8d2bLPTRjURCn0mm8oGnVi8CHuf4
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eACfAs7J1voY8FhB49QRzNYhbBmT89GPHqt2EB0ywvgWUyXcUlQDAxMZYYETdoHGkeAEljw8xgQ/KN+9v6AKA=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:c408:: with SMTP id
 v8-v6mr4262186itf.131.1540586277318; 
 Fri, 26 Oct 2018 13:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Sungho Hong <maverickjin88@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 13:37:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK8vx=hTRJu5EmWTLwx_X8a9dr3DREr8XEhEGNxi=h4g72=E4Q@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: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 20:37:58 -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