From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19521C433F5 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 04:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F9C60F6D for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 04:56:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 91F9C60F6D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dpdk.org Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 905B440151; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 06:56:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lf1-f53.google.com (mail-lf1-f53.google.com [209.85.167.53]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0529B4014F for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 06:56:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf1-f53.google.com with SMTP id i4so1222102lfv.4 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:56:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qYh41UHiSBVKgaf1qa30S5GlKkuMuRIumAVtQszPcpk=; b=Jm9EFjLPIk0nRWmtwd+DmUdh1UEPWFqMJeyXn41qFGmVSCIGRO7NXVJeF+AZaPEMUH 9llDN8vIboVmZeGKMmbqi6PHzbm5+QaCF8MaTTxeOvzjowP/QS3vMcvEt1BUQdcYCLVo Bh4RDLslRNvy614Dd9OEm5keLj/7habKAhZ+2kqOOsVLxEapqI1LM/00Py7veOcbavjh SInAf03HxUsMiiMByGWy8x5qY/9hlTeHZDSPqFftnk0/as+c6rtrakOAbpL8JUNLBQlT eytQKPtvAW3ZaV0lM6sT2OQnZ+r7w9/uta0P9WSUo2LuFMzbYOiBOk3s6WxxfPnNdy99 3SJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qYh41UHiSBVKgaf1qa30S5GlKkuMuRIumAVtQszPcpk=; b=GQE9DnJHcAGEhiBEBmpOQR+6D60MjwekcgJAh5ahyv1E94czVxl3sQAodJNZEhpJRk d5o2JDFgKbubA6l/l+mu/yyg51GPIWqkl2csmFfzrw5keEyveCdRIeGy0HjyLVhVWKXC nEjfkJu9iFn7jrcu0M6PjbGCNVnRjowa0/U+sQcxsYp/lMvWYPBNQ+IBd1jNUhJXo2Dn t/FH4BZ3Yd9GpPMeag9BrcpxQ3eMmyhRv8fj0psMieGmB082x5fu+6sCtRSspRXE6Ugp MUE/B0ELtJig3tgP4RUOYEub1bJSshj3yvW6p6pKWydtuaQcYgU+lWLNqxso7hZn9Bya +Kzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tntGuo7dYZxgGIomlYGErZ329AofAqOLOixc43BHHDxME+Lxi u0GPEYkoRa3NroEk02IQTVoJbpJu2xJY1R0QCexEhJCtTY8TNw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzQZv1MgKaGvXTdefrne6eBPz8E0adcDTW/FKw4+PX5NdSl31pTnzzo15dbaD4mRvNe6RVIB3wDAXRr4AOt06M= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:1052:: with SMTP id c18mr4397540lfb.223.1631509011225; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:56:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Kamaraj P Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:26:40 +0530 Message-ID: To: dev Cc: "Burakov, Anatoly" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Max Mbuf Allocation X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hello All, Would like to understand or if there are any guidelines to allocate the max no of mbuf per NIC ? For example, if i have defined as below: #define RX_RING_SIZE 1024 #define TX_RING_SIZE 1024 The Maximum RX/TX queues can be defined as 8 per NIC, What would be the max no of mbuf can be allocated per NIC ? Please share if there is any guildliness or any limitation to increase the mbuf ? Thanks, Kamaraj