On 29 May 2015 at 18:03, Zoltan Kiss <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > On 29/05/15 16:58, Jerin Jacob wrote: > >> I agree. Is it possbile to dedicate "core 0"/"any core" in ODP-DPDK >> implementation >> to do the house keeping job ? If we are planning for ODP-DPDK >> implementation as just wrapper over DPDK API then there will not be any >> value addition to use the ODP API. At least from my experience, We have >> changed our SDK "a lot" to fit into ODP model. IMO that kind of effort >> will >> be required for useful ODP-DPDK port. >> > > It would be good to have some input from other implementations as well: > when do you release the sent packets in the Cavium implementation? > Most networking SoC's have HW buffer management. Buffers are automatically freed after transmission. On reception, free buffers are automatically allocated (potentially after classification so the HW knows which buffer pool to use). HW buffer management actually saves a measurable amount of cycles, on an old Freescale PowerQUICC device (with SW-managed RX/TX rings), I estimated the overhead of SW buffer management (not thread-safe) to be around 90 cycles which is a lot when the total per-packet cost was around 600 cycles.
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
