Hi All, Can someone please provide comments on queries in below mail? Regards, Satish Babu
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:24 PM, satish <nsatishbabu at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I need comments on performance impact with DPDK-QoS. > > We are working on developing a application based on DPDK. > Our application supports IPv4 forwarding with and without QoS. > > Without QOS, we are achieving almost full wire rate (bi-directional > traffic) with 128, 256 and 512 byte packets. > But when we enabled QoS, performance dropped to half for 128 and 256 byte > packets. > For 512 byte packet, we didn't observe any drop even after enabling QoS > (Achieving full wire rate). > Traffic used in both the cases is same. ( One stream with Qos match to > first queue in traffic class 0) > > In our application, we are using memory buffer pools to receive the packet > bursts (Ring buffer is not used). > Same buffer is used during packet processing and TX (enqueue and dequeue). > All above handled on the same core. > > For normal forwarding(without QoS), we are using rte_eth_tx_burst for TX. > > For forwarding with QoS, using rte_sched_port_pkt_write(), > rte_sched_port_enqueue () and rte_sched_port_dequeue () > before rte_eth_tx_burst (). > > We understood that performance dip in case of 128 and 256 byte packet is > bacause > of processing more number of packets compared to 512 byte packet. > > Can some comment on performance dip in my case with QOS enabled? > [1] can this be because of inefficient use of RTE calls for QoS? > [2] Is it the poor buffer management? > [3] any other comments? > > To achieve good performance in QoS case, is it must to use worker thread > (running on different core) with ring buffer? > > Please provide your comments. > > Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > Satish Babu > > -- Regards, Satish Babu
