From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: Question on the Ring Library Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:25:48 -0800 Message-ID: <20131204132548.05a151fe@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: Sambath Kumar Balasubramanian Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 03:46:36 -0800 Sambath Kumar Balasubramanian wrote: > Hi, > > The ring library seems to be an excellent IPC. But looking at one use > case where the fast path code posts events to event thread for example, the > event thread will spend some cycles polling the ring rather than waiting > for the event. One approach could be a fast path code basically posts the > event in the ring as is today and there is a background thread that polls > the queues and wakes up the event threads. This is similar to Linux > SOFTIRQs.The event threads are asynchronous. Is this a fair model to avoid > extra polling CPU cycles by the event threads? Is there any other > alternatives in dpdk? > > Regards, > Sambath I have in several cases combined RTE ring with use of eventfd + poll to get wakeup