I wonder why calling eth_dev_tx_burst in a tight loop doesn't allow to write the packets into the transmit buffer. Only solution I found is to include a small delay after the tx_burst that is less than the estimated serialization time of the packet in order to be able to saturate the ethernet line.
Anyway I wonder if this is the right approach. Thx, Antonio. On Sun, Jul 3, 2022 at 10:19 PM Gábor LENCSE <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Antonio, > > According to my experience, the rte_eth_tx_burst() function reports the > packets as "sent" (by a non-zero return value), when they are still in > the transmit buffer. > > (If you are interested in the details, you can see them in Section 3.6.5 > of this paper: http://www.hit.bme.hu/~lencse/publications/e104-b_2_128.pdf ) > > Therefore, I think that the return value of 0 may mean that > rte_eth_tx_burst() can't even commit itself for the future delivery of > the packets. I could only guess why. E.g. all its resources have been > exhausted. > > Best regards, > > Gábor > > > 7/3/2022 5:57 PM keltezéssel, Antonio Di Bacco írta: > > I'm trying to send packets continuously in a tight loop with a burst > > size of 8 and packets are 9600 bytes long. > > If I don't insert a delay after the rte_eth_tx_burst it always returns 0. > > > > What's the explanation of this behaviour ? > > > > Best regards, > > Antonio. >
