From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-f173.google.com (mail-yw0-f173.google.com [209.85.161.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388622935 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:35:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-yw0-f173.google.com with SMTP id o66so109444938ywc.3 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:35:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tencara-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=chIDVg/Q9kgEADnw5PRLvpL3ouoJu0IPXuyv2Jg8CD8=; b=q1V1kwlgvGYla/DWCkFCHdQS3CYCMY6Ct8iBas8klcE2oxShFUr3UKvM80caITKOXv gO/BFOTXP8R8zHZ3EsqEAWgvcbh369BPYlZP3SKBxcFzLkVySN0GbS2iqnjNO0K1H5ax gxv5sHrICedt5d+bbcvzNO9z6FoaIDaNDwlyMCU5b5ZVVRQU+407RfCztZY/kpySxdHS OshZGTvDPKIJU+CfIbwLUu0GhtibU2nH6qJy3lTAf+J+fRSB7JmwqtekmJ4teNa7IfV3 /CZ+ZVwhoaeaYart6rCQwMMGIv+RL2wWYUIPIUDo1epmA7Is7xc9QmF86y/bUbuV7toz E+tQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=chIDVg/Q9kgEADnw5PRLvpL3ouoJu0IPXuyv2Jg8CD8=; b=RjhZLxqf18zDhPcpYjjjWHmodwEpFFx0l5CzwlJechEwt0d7tNbRKS7SIOclAy1bw7 0qBokXUdGeD0sn5/QslPi8HAVtKA4BrBUa4rnjvuYzAN1pbAs4OumLHP2eswfuOBLP9r hkwJlw9jg3tg7PwjDl5O8H3Uu2N4ZydoEO9ziN5MQtyXSu5r1FcICYSkbzFj3+NKaWMt NTZqxyYKZay2JjbwraQXO6VuAj6ChWAJUZRACxFM6zkpdQwNftsolov4lZLHZNOMwkEf l35Naqd0IILXu29LGOGeraCokPHD41s1jfmp2e9MChZPBFwszzlSvBWthGmyxAJSqX/u 0vMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUgrDNN10WCIFEvVCTrYES3o4u/l0ag4r0Tzpjgj+Bw+L3fmXJ5LrxZ3/VQ/E6twCDXcwDBMnxk9jF5KQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.13.229.131 with SMTP id o125mr8926212ywe.164.1460651708593; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.198.70 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:35:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9485D7B0-E2EA-4D23-BBD9-6D233BDF8E29@gmail.com> References: <9485D7B0-E2EA-4D23-BBD9-6D233BDF8E29@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:35:08 -0400 Message-ID: From: Shawn Lewis To: Alexander Kiselev Cc: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Lcore impact X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:35:09 -0000 Lots of things... One just because you have a process running on an lcore, does not mean thats all that runs on it. Unless you have told the kernel at boot to NOT use those specific cores, those cores will be used for many things OS related. IRQBlance System OS operations. Other Applications. So by doing file i/o you are generating interrupts, where those interrupts get serviced is up to IRQBalancer. So could be any one of your cores. On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Alexander Kiselev wrote: > Could someone give me any hints about what could cause permormance issues > in a situation where one lcore doing a lot of linux system calls > (read/write on socket) slow down the other lcore doing packet forwarding? > In my test the forwarding lcore doesn't share any memory structures with > the other lcore that sends test data to socket. Both lcores pins to > different processors cores. So therotically they shouldn't have any impact > on each other but they do, once one lcore starts sending data to socket the > other lcore starts dropping packets. Why? >