gt; Second, I have ever check the performance w/o DPDK in packet size 1518 in
>> the
>>>> same environment, and indeed it can get 160G totally (by IRQ balance
>> method).
>>>> So, I was so surprised to get this kinds of result in DPDK (I also use
>>>>
G.
>> Why the performance gets less than 120G? Why only 10 ports works fine and NO
>> Tx and Rx in the others?
>> Is it bugs or limitations in DPDK?
>>
>> Has anyone every do the similar or the same test?
>>
>>
>> On 07/10/2014 04:40 PM, Alex Mark
more than 12
ports, I only can get 100G.
Why the performance gets less than 120G? Why only 10 ports works fine and NO Tx
and Rx in the others?
Is it bugs or limitations in DPDK?
Has anyone every do the similar or the same test?
On 07/10/2014 04:40 PM, Alex Markuze wrote:
Hi Zachary,
Your issue may
Hey Guys,
Recently, I have used l2fwd to test 160G (82599 10G * 16 ports), but I
got a strange pheromone in my test.
When I used 12 ports to test the performance of l2fwd, it can work fine
and achieve 120G.
But it got abnormal when I using over than 12 port. Part of ports seems
something wrong an
operation.
/Bob
-- ??? ? --
???: "Zachary";<mailto:zachary.jen at
cas-well.com>;
: 2013?9?2?(???) ??11:22
???: "dev"<mailto:dev at dpdk.org>;
??: " "Yannic.Chou (???) : 6808" <mailto:yannic.chou at cas-well.
Hi~
I have a question about DPDK & QPI performance issue in Romley platform.
Recently, I use DPDK example, l2fwd, to test DPDK's performance in my Romley
platform.
When I try to do the test, crossing used CPU, I find the performance
dramatically decrease.
Is it true? Or any method can prove the
6 matches
Mail list logo