On 29/10/2020 21:07, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 24/09/2020 19:12, Alexander Kotliarov:
>> Hi there!
>> I would like to find out what is the policy regarding changes to the DPDK's
>> kmod drivers such as igb_uio.ko within a DPDK's LTS release. Are these
>> changes backward compatible?
>> For
Hi Jared,
inline
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Wednesday 29 September 2021 11:30
> To: Jared Brown
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce ;
> Kinsella, Ray ; Ananyev, Konstantin
> ; Yigit, Ferruh
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] DPDK CPU sel
I would guess it - I would say it is related to cache alignment.
Assuming each entry is 8 bytes
Ray K
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Thursday 4 November 2021 14:12
> To: Syam Prasad N Pearson
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; d...@dpdk.org; Wang, Yipeng1
> ; Gobriel, Sameh
Can you supply “cat /proc/cmdline” please?
Ray K
From: Antonio Di Bacco
Sent: Tuesday 1 March 2022 14:52
To: users@dpdk.org
Subject: DPDK on isolated cores but I still see interrupts
I am trying to run a DPDK application on x86_64 Machine (Ubuntu 20.04) on
isolated cores.
I expected not to
Better is a _very_ subjective.
pcm-memory does one thing well.
That whole suite is worth playing with though.
Ray K
From: Antonio Di Bacco
Sent: Thursday 19 May 2022 10:04
To: Kinsella, Ray
Cc: Sanford, Robert ; users@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: DPDK performances surprise
This tool seems awesome
I’d say that is likely yes.
FYI - pcm-memory is very handy tool for looking at memory traffic.
https://github.com/opcm/pcm
Thanks,
Ray K
From: Sanford, Robert
Sent: Wednesday 18 May 2022 17:53
To: Antonio Di Bacco ; users@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: DPDK performances surprise
My guess is that most
I have heard of such a thing done through AF_PACKET (and friends), but not
directly with a DPDK PMD.
Ray K
From: Yigit, Ferruh
Sent: Thursday 19 May 2022 13:50
To: me thi ; users@dpdk.org
Cc: Hemant Agrawal
Subject: RE: DPDK and wifi
[AMD Official Use Only - General]
Hi me thi,
There is
From: kratika varshney
Sent: Monday 16 May 2022 11:46
To: users@dpdk.org
Subject: i40evf_reset_vf(): VF is still resetting
Hi,
I am facing a problem with DPDK-20.05 with i40e driver.
May 16 11:09:14 35209300b8bb fpa[9282]: EAL: Probing VFIO support...
May 16 11:09:16 35209300b8bb fpa[9282]:
Hi Antonio,
If it is an Intel Platform you are using.
You can take a look at the Intel Memory Latency Checker.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/tool/intelr-memory-latency-checker.html
(don't be fooled by the name, it does measure bandwidth).
Ray K
-Original
Have you tried testing with Jitter?
Looking through the CSIT data, will give an idea of the reasonable ranges for
results.
Intel ICELAKE
https://docs.fd.io/csit/master/report/introduction/test_environment_sut_calib_icx.html
Intel CASCADE LAKE
Hi Nick,
Adding Jerin to direct your query. As I think you need some of the ARM guys to
chime in here, coherency constraints are ARM is different to Intel.
Ray K
From: Nick Tian
Sent: Tuesday 9 August 2022 12:32
To: Nick Tian ; Burakov, Anatoly
; Kinsella, Ray ;
users@dpdk.org
Cc: Jason Liu
I may be incorrect, but is it not simply the case, that when using the no-huge
parameter that MAP_HUGETLB is omitted from flags?
Ray K
From: Nick Tian
Sent: Tuesday 9 August 2022 03:55
To: users@dpdk.org
Subject: About memory coherency
Hi
I am confusing about the "no-huge" option of DPDK
12 matches
Mail list logo
