From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Sergey Vyazmitinov <s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kni: fast data availability check in thread_single loop
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:35:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1d063572-a495-ce22-b605-7c748f980b61@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK_zqSO5U7JQnwChS=1Emp_ZPc_+TixZiT6hBDqv846GtQEs9Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 1/18/2017 11:05 AM, Sergey Vyazmitinov wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>> wrote:
>
<...>
> &knet->kni_list_head, list) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < KNI_RX_DATA_LOOP_NUM; ++i) {
>
> When there are multiple KNI interfaces, and lets assume there is traffic
> too, this will behave like:
>
> KNI1x2500 data_packets + KNI2x2500 data_packets .... KNI10x2500
>
> After data packets, KNI1 resp_packet + KNI2 resp_packets ...
>
> Won't this scenario also may cause latency? And perhaps jitter according
> KNI interface traffic loads?
>
> This may be good for some use cases, but not sure if this is good
> for all.
>
> We can decrease KNI_RX_DATA_LOOP_NUM to some reasonable value.
> I can make test to find lower bound.
I believe the effect of these changes differ per use case, and load on
interfaces, may not work as well for everybody.
> Also, the point is in fast check for a new data in interface rx queue.
> May be will be better add some kind of break after several kni_net_rx calls.
> Without them loop ends very quickly.
> Anyway, this patch decrease average latency in my case from 4.5ms to
4.5ms is too slow, can there be any other issue?
> 0.011ms in ping test with 100000 packets.
<...>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-18 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-29 23:23 [PATCH] kni: fast data availability check in thread_single loop Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-11 17:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-01-18 11:05 ` Sergey Vyazmitinov
2017-01-18 12:35 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2017-01-18 13:11 ` Jay Rolette
2017-03-10 12:59 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-03-10 13:16 ` Jay Rolette
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1d063572-a495-ce22-b605-7c748f980b61@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=s.vyazmitinov@brain4net.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox