From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zain2294@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1056B2B8C
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 Jul 2016 19:34:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id z126so49426745wme.0
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc; bh=DtMoR0G//oszRQAPWOLjWFQp465OajFC9ypRv/JvVvY=;
 b=tNUyrWUvg3DfPmX6+G42gJqYEtZJBKz31SoFApSdtZGrnM5kOroI5j4U8K4i392ENo
 VWyOg3vqdsFm2XmFteGvCclyEJXBIV3deD6FlyLymniA9Rg2pDJEJJdJlp6ZASjntyRR
 NxlsLJiid0H5qcG0U+2aqj8FYAFI57n/Act7MCKI28HrQlvfjbtMMbvKkWPEiSszDVHs
 Jrcn3kKe8e3/MNbaxDHrsckSsGMxcKZi8psMaf52kdva4kPmBkXt34x4N7651PtjNIFg
 Kblzy9wV6PPvhmxWQ3PDtOhCKwOcy+DvPzxmVmY+ctomHs/LhX2YjT7Rv3TlNroPIiTh
 SciQ==
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=DtMoR0G//oszRQAPWOLjWFQp465OajFC9ypRv/JvVvY=;
 b=MRn4sw6V+bAoNuJ9BTXA3UoNjIOgW7JXe4eN5ofS1Vt/goPUAeHCctFJuM3K5ZGwEn
 7h9djE4zL1c59YPt2MNbGIUm0wPMr+WCcs0W7jGiY2EtYSzcNC6WbwCE9ozPIt2TDbfv
 ndaWr6+w++yzEF843K3GvAKKGK3RBSWSYkHijGuk04TfmgCz6zAV7e9AQnYkzD/5OnK+
 XIKOQ5Id+gLAGiFSDk2e6KvjI8O65tolqkS3C0+BtvC5r6YHhcOM5jHhyT3+3sS+UEL0
 MmopYt35iS7cAggDHlTwIFLU2S6x/XLrefyyHZMACarXxqw/I570SiSMbIWH1Z7dtsAw
 AkMg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLT/3ZZ4pi9cO4F2k7xjYBuVIhfnX9WTOAfV5hIpUu5VRxda2/JwQLp/o/Puzxqb5o47qUIqWNcrNp3eg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.88.5 with SMTP id bc5mr12519038wjb.100.1467653681871;
 Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.56.3 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 10:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.56.3 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 10:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHtRHyDPhVtW1q9D7N=LgNCV2w26uaK0cv8tD+k1uVZQ=vvSkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHtRHyDPhVtW1q9D7N=LgNCV2w26uaK0cv8tD+k1uVZQ=vvSkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 22:34:41 +0500
Message-ID: <CAN7yQ2o0EmPzLkmtjeaDDQQCmjSBwed3VG3VjgKBvg2DF4MSJw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen <zain2294@gmail.com>
To: Sepehr Nazary <sepehr.nazary@googlemail.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] multi core performance problem
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 17:34:42 -0000

I am no expert with memory bandwidth and hardware acceleration. But what i
can infer from this issue is that 1 of 2 things
1. Either QPI is being used and the maximum bandwidth is achieved
2. Or RAM has reached it's maximum bandwidth and this is the reason the
higher orders core are getting more bandwidth then lower order

But keith, and Thomas can tell you more on this subject