From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <aber@semihalf.com>
Received: from mail-it0-f44.google.com (mail-it0-f44.google.com
 [209.85.214.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 172CA37B6
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 19:40:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it0-f44.google.com with SMTP id n128so91856831ith.1
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=qeKHFnRvJ7N51UjvNF0yWpPoqtfYpGZ1b+OD2ZgBYTw=;
 b=ygHNkY2nqCkzued5sNsKifrHzN1huIEpBBJigv6EoIi/Yij9O2GM23Sdpn1gCZx3e/
 ZqLi5S2fJaBpVMzJD3oMpr3UnXySkyyYCsPKSdsyu5pgPyJOxIh9DWwu8TOVYiyveCZ1
 bvIcqEARCQSaamN/MpMQm1qXK3EHKbxuD0q6sD5BoWRXIRRDDvqveGXBb1pjOmoR1GCx
 9P5lwHK0xL82q/YMpOzuiNpM6p5Lqndl8CLOerkXcM8AYtKPhrqqCoW78R3P1V/JnL+B
 NcIYnML93VvhVkJi+AjzSUfenmgyJrLzeSsiQctytU14fa1TQLNgV4sKcYqCucU+mjD7
 rUQg==
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:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=qeKHFnRvJ7N51UjvNF0yWpPoqtfYpGZ1b+OD2ZgBYTw=;
 b=JmgncBQbMf/M0YQkfVC/w7o3enRDKahV6ehWXezBWi7sI8jsHjbAumJtGSmGVw4ZN5
 I0vEE3ifZkLXq8WwDvYPzarVZ079XvxFVM6gH25D+5srDWvyCmKkSr+Hre5kNAR6DeE8
 3dOWSqXiNn40PcczlXdMw3uq+DXNm4X7HlcAYPgB5F1DVtzxfz8rf70eirJIs0dEO8NL
 Pj+u4fB/wjVKtcU/Zp7M1MbpBCtVg0KsfesT1pbNqoLNmRx3KCjN9LYrKQLrbC8K+hyj
 iOdvyU+PDWY6uxju4YStHqedNwCm2mLuoCTJ+IZVNE/6GU0ra1+HVBUOfIkVZB2Ym0lw
 kR4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooute6VQX/LhFsf3sB8wrJm8qfM2V+ftGjrMYBG866UJiD/QIQREivJprGtxoAbU79K7cjsVmBiJxV3Uekg==
X-Received: by 10.36.65.27 with SMTP id x27mr22695724ita.90.1471887655476;
 Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.79.15.68 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201608222037241031642@sina.cn>
References: <201608222037241031642@sina.cn>
From: Andriy Berestovskyy <aber@semihalf.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 19:40:35 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOysbxo00erRR_pd2GoTyd6ZkN9UkceDBd+PpGKOqmcybHPa4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "forsakening@sina.cn" <forsakening@sina.cn>
Cc: users <users@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Is anybody test rte_mbuf_free performance?
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, 22 Aug 2016 17:40:56 -0000

Hi,
Here are few suggestions for you:

1. Try to increase mempool cache.

2. Try to split the load across few mempools.

3. Try to free in bulks as many PMDs do.

Regards,
Andriy


On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:37 PM, forsakening@sina.cn
<forsakening@sina.cn> wrote:
> Hi Everyone=EF=BC=9A
> I found  rte_pktmbuf_free not performe so well when using greater than 12=
 parallel caller=E3=80=82
> Is anyone meet the same problem =EF=BC=9FThanks for giving a direction.
>
>
>
> forsakening@sina.cn



--=20
Andriy Berestovskyy