From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com (mail-it0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86AF17EC7 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 21:55:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id d10-v6so8609850itj.5 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:55:24 -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=QaUexKe0c9psx/9KVXIwCOOSRQYt4NeuoEfukHdFbZ0=; b=D86lSzk3ASTip/RTGSWeiaGBtmXeHVO/P+u7roFUv7PmlL7E/j3+Ur/aU2G7k/ZRKH CmaLHE+iLKgtoOPVVpBh2lkTozpx+x4TSKC5zJtCFB7zcxymksH2+bMTmfPQpt85UKqE hrqrwsCnTzl7jbeRrP5ZxXYNKF7KlHIuNDieL5/j0yqBAD3emRMtmjfpMCx0ZdCJ64kO KBYfhlvrkDqlQXRNvz3S+hO028+g+Q7AGtI8B3SxA8WYwnSBbSs7pR/fy1hddHz5GE17 eft1vm4DTxYk41Q9WmGPlwYSYewZ6KVKwsRaqSZzNj8OQfWTggIsz75cFhzt2apcyr6Z 0KTQ== 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=QaUexKe0c9psx/9KVXIwCOOSRQYt4NeuoEfukHdFbZ0=; b=ONt+YGX2ASdI9POscvo6B+ZyjYulxNIPgbr1GnYG50U+70IZ6FtFGpg5ZD322mDVyC 2uzErminwHGKF5bUt0qajIi9Ww2rKqWNuS5XEfXf5lGvJlQI4ihkURALe3TVJv/UUQp4 ypBIv0z09IQEIusmcCRytSAw945X9iHO4y8IXOfNZaBa+OlbfxVZVaqtodErMSfj95Fs DKB7PEZMFq7sdgcSK8fego2oF/1X+nwlcLjUzvuCw/n12GfiLtsVK/Vtmu+x+C/OXz8y /GJWySz5FpYY4csK5dwthv8pDXFIS/LJWIZwFH7s7+OOozfKtzsaEQPVWRAe/hiLWd3V 3VbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DHihTmiENw2kPB+HZXjvT/YD0MlYwtfbEfa6dxP7nqTOgRmMUO w6klf6HVfHDX8A8JxlnIbu4hEh846gXk5vkXjmgKaIPl X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZm4B6Bz/d5lhmUjHL3FsbusQGoOg7ez7UHxPvGIJ+Y3w2XMtOSd5kMmUHdeY6B1rWJUcD3JkR2ME5bO3Lu8iA= X-Received: by 2002:a24:c48a:: with SMTP id v132-v6mr6617585itf.72.1535745323457; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:55:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a02:3004:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:55:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Sungho Hong Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:55:22 -0700 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] low performance of send and receiving single message in RTE_RING 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 19:55:25 -0000 Hello, DPDK-users, I am wondering whether there is a good explanation for high latency caused by rte_ring when testing the round-trip latency using 1 burst in (tx rx queue). I have tested the performance using two nodes (client and server) and calculated the elapsed latency of the round-trip of single pingpong. The latency is calculated on two different test-cases 1. elapsed latency of send and receive directly from rx tx queue. 2. elapsed latency of send and receive from rte_ring. Latency with direct tx rx queue with 1 burst When I send a single messages (512, 1024, 4096 bytes) (1 burst for each request) and receive 1 burst of response from the remote server. the latency is approximately 4 ~ 8 microseconds. RTE_RING Latency with 1 burst When I use rte_ring to send and receive data from client and server, the latency increases like crazy which is 59 microseconds to 100 microseconds. RTE_RING Latency with 10 bursts When I use bursts for example (10 messages per request) and calculate the elapsed latency by dividing the total elapsed time with the total ping-pong messages (total-latency)/(total ping-pong received messages). I could get a very good performance using rte_ring 7 ~ 10 microseconds. I was wondering whether someone can tell me what I should look at in order to decrease the latency of RTE_RING. Because even though I don't use multiple bursts, the latency should be low.