Here are a few references. Strictly speaking, DPDK and SR-IOV are orthogonal. DPDK is intended to facilitate cloud-native operation through hardware independence. SR-IOV presumes SR-IOV-compliant hardware.
[1] Z. Xu, F. Liu, T. Wang, and H. Xu, “Demystifying the energy efficiency of Network Function Virtualization,” in 2016 IEEE/ACM 24th International Symposium on Quality of Service (IWQoS), Jun. 2016, pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.1109/IWQoS.2016.7590429. [2] S. Fu, J. Liu, and W. Zhu, “Multimedia Content Delivery with Network Function Virtualization: The Energy Perspective,” IEEE MultiMedia, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 38–47, 2017, ISSN: 1941-0166. DOI: 10.1109/MMUL.2017.3051514. [3] X. Li, W. Cheng, T. Zhang, F. Ren, and B. Yang, “Towards Power Efficient High Performance Packet I/O,” IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 981–996, April 2020, ISSN:1558-2183. DOI: 10.1109/TPDS.2019.2957746. [4] G. Li, D. Zhang, Y. Li, and K. Li, “Toward energy efficiency optimization of pktgen-DPDK for green network testbeds,” China Communications, vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 199–207, November 2018, ISSN: 1673-5447. DOI: 10.1109/CC.2018.8543100. On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 12:45 PM Etienne-Victor Depasquale <ed...@ieee.org> wrote: > The way I saw, the questions induce the public to conclude that DPDK >> ALWAYS has 100% CPU usage, which is not true. > > > I don't concur. > > Every research paper I've read indicates that, regardless of whether it > has packets to process or not, DPDK PMDs (poll-mode drivers) prevent the > CPU from falling into an LPI (low-power idle). > > When it has no packets to process, the PMD runs the processor in a polling > loop that keeps utilization of the running core at 100%. > > Cheers, > > Etienne > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 12:33 PM Douglas Fischer <fischerdoug...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm very happy to see interest in DPDK and power consumption. >> >> But IMHO, the questions do not cover the actual reality of DPDK. >> That característic of "100% CPU" depends on several aspects, like: >> - How old are the hardware on DPDK. >> - What type of DPDK Instructions are made(Very Dynamic as >> Statefull CGNAT, ou Static ACLs?) >> - Using or not the measurements of DPDK Input/Drop/Fowarding. >> - CPU Affinity done according to the demand of traffic >> - SR-IOV (sharing resources) on DPDK. >> >> The way I saw, the questions induce the public to conclude that DPDK >> ALWAYS has 100% CPU usage, which is not true. >> >> >> Em seg., 22 de fev. de 2021 às 04:30, Etienne-Victor Depasquale < >> ed...@ieee.org> escreveu: >> >>> Hello folks, >>> >>> I've just followed a thread regarding use of CGNAT and noted a >>> suggestion (regarding DANOS) that includes use of DPDK. >>> >>> As I'm interested in the breadth of adoption of DPDK, and as I'm a >>> researcher into energy and power efficiency, I'd love to hear your feedback >>> on your use of power consumption control by DPDK. >>> >>> I've drawn up a bare-bones, 2-question survey at this link: >>> >>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/J886DPY. >>> >>> Responses have been set to anonymous. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Etienne >>> >>> -- >>> Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale >>> Assistant Lecturer >>> Department of Communications & Computer Engineering >>> Faculty of Information & Communication Technology >>> University of Malta >>> Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale >>> >> >> >> -- >> Douglas Fernando Fischer >> Engº de Controle e Automação >> > > > -- > Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale > Assistant Lecturer > Department of Communications & Computer Engineering > Faculty of Information & Communication Technology > University of Malta > Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale > -- Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale Assistant Lecturer Department of Communications & Computer Engineering Faculty of Information & Communication Technology University of Malta Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale
