Re: [ovs-dev] OVS with DPDK Meetup notes

-----Original Message-----
From: Flavio Leitner [mailto:fbl@sysclose.org]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 11:51 PM
To: Traynor, Kevin
Cc: dev@openvswitch.org; users@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] OVS with DPDK Meetup notes

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 05:56:08PM +0000, Traynor, Kevin wrote:

quoted

Hi All,

Just wanted to post some summary notes on the recent OVS with DPDK Meetup

we

quoted

had after the OVS conference. Thanks to everyone for the often lively

discussion.

quoted

I've collated and condensed Maryam's notes (Thank you Maryam) with my own.
Corrections and additions are welcome.

Thanks for having organized the event and for the good notes.

quoted

Usability
==========
* Single binary for OVS/OVS with DPDK and static vs. dynamic linking
  - Discussion around deployment and what the best model is.
  - Flavio has posted a mail on this
   http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-November/062599.html

Let us know if you find a performance difference between static vs
dynamic linking.  We might be able to accommodate both options in
the same spec, but it seems we should go with shared linking only
to keep it simple for now.

Yes, will do. I seem to recall from when we looked at this on a previous
project it was a few hundred kpps but it was a long time ago, so I'm not
certain how many.

quoted

Features
========
* Multiqueue vhost-user
  - Looks really promising - will help us scale out performance to the VM.

I see that vhost PMD is moving and if it gets accepted, it would
be a nice clean up for OVS.  Do you know if there is someone working
on this already?

I agree, it should simplify the code a lot. Ciara reviewed it and did a
quick integration to see if the api would work. The patch was churning quite
a bit, so we decided to hold off doing any more work with it for the time being.

quoted

* dpdkr/ivshmem
  - Still useful. Check/Update documentation to ensure limitations are

clear.

Yeah, same thing here.

Thanks,
fbl

quoted

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 05:56:08PM +0000, Traynor, Kevin wrote:

quoted

Hi All,

Just wanted to post some summary notes on the recent OVS with DPDK

Meetup

quoted

we

quoted

had after the OVS conference. Thanks to everyone for the often lively

discussion.

quoted

I've collated and condensed Maryam's notes (Thank you Maryam) with

my own.

quoted

quoted

Corrections and additions are welcome.

Thanks for having organized the event and for the good notes.

quoted

Usability
==========
* Single binary for OVS/OVS with DPDK and static vs. dynamic linking
  - Discussion around deployment and what the best model is.
  - Flavio has posted a mail on this
   http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-November/062599.html

Let us know if you find a performance difference between static vs
dynamic linking.  We might be able to accommodate both options in
the same spec, but it seems we should go with shared linking only
to keep it simple for now.

Yes, will do. I seem to recall from when we looked at this on a previous
project it was a few hundred kpps but it was a long time ago, so I'm not
certain how many.

quoted

quoted

Features
========
* Multiqueue vhost-user
  - Looks really promising - will help us scale out performance to the VM.

I see that vhost PMD is moving and if it gets accepted, it would
be a nice clean up for OVS.  Do you know if there is someone working
on this already?

I agree, it should simplify the code a lot. Ciara reviewed it and did a
quick integration to see if the api would work. The patch was churning quite
a bit, so we decided to hold off doing any more work with it for the time
being.

Correct, the vHost PMD really cleans things up and removes the need for a lot of code in netdev-dpdk. The netdev_class for phy ports and vhost-user ports could be pretty much the same, except for the construct functions.

quoted

quoted

* dpdkr/ivshmem
  - Still useful. Check/Update documentation to ensure limitations are

clear.

Yeah, same thing here.

Thanks,
fbl