[dpdk-dev] one worker reading multiple ports

[Newman Poborsky]

Thank you for your answer.

I just realized that the reason the rte_eth_rx_burst() returns 0 is because
inside ixgbe_recv_pkts() this fails:
nmb = rte_rxmbuf_alloc(rxq->mb_pool);  => nmb is NULL

Does this mean that every RX queue should have its own rte_mempool?  If so,
are there any optimal values for: number of RX descriptors, per-queue
rte_mempool size, number of hugepages (from what I understand, these 3 are
correlated)?

If I'm wrong, please explain why.

Thanks!

BR,
Newman

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:56 AM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Newman,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Newman Poborsky
> > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 8:34 AM
> > To: dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] one worker reading multiple ports
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > is it possible to use one worker thread (one lcore) to read packets from
> > multiple ports?
> >
> > When I start 2 workers and assign each one  to read from different ports
> > (with  rte_eth_rx_burst()) everything works fine, but if I assign one
> > worker to read packets from 2 ports, rte_eth_rx_burst() returns 0 as if
> no
> > packets are read.
>
> Yes, it is totally possible. The only problem would be if you try to use
> multiple threads
> to read/write on one port, in which case you should use multiple queues.
> Look at l3fwd app for instance. You can use just a single core to handle
> packets on multiple ports.
>
> Pablo
> >
> > Is there any reason for this kind of behaviour?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Br,
> > Newman P.
>