> On Mar 14, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles at intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> On 3/14/15, 8:47 AM, "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles at intel.com
> <mailto:keith.wiles at intel.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Matt
>>
>> On 3/13/15, 3:49 PM, "Matt Smith" <mgsmith at netgate.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I?ve been using DPDK pktgen 2.8.0 (built against DPDK 1.8.0 libraries) to
>>> send traffic on a server using an Intel 82599 (X520-2). Traffic gets sent
>>> out port 1 through another server which also an Intel 82599 installed and
>>> is forwarded back into port 0. When I send using a single source and
>>> destination IP address, this works fine and packets arrive on port 0 at
>>> close to the maximum line rate.
>>>
>>> If I change port 1 to range mode and send traffic from a range of source
>>> IP addresses to a single destination IP address, for a second or two the
>>> display indicates that some packets were received on port 0 but then the
>>> rate of received packets on the display goes to 0 and all incoming
>>> packets on port 0 are registered as rx errors.
>>>
>>> The server that traffic is being forwarded through is running the
>>> ip_pipeline example app. I ruled this out as the source of the problem by
>>> sending directly from port 1 to port 0 of the pktgen box. The issue still
>>> occurs when the traffic is not being forwarded through the other box.
>>> Since ip_pipeline is able to receive the packets and forward them without
>>> getting rx errors and it?s running with the same model of NIC as pktgen
>>> is using, I checked to see if there were any differences in
>>> initialization of the rx port between ip_pipeline and pktgen. I noticed
>>> that pktgen has a setting that ip_pipeline doesn't:
>>>
>>> const struct rte_eth_conf port_conf = {
>>> .rxmode = {
>>> .mq_mode = ETH_MQ_RX_RSS,
>>>
>>> If I comment out the .mq_mode setting and rebuild pktgen, the problem no
>>> longer occurs and I now receive packets on port 0 at near line rate when
>>> testing from a range of source addresses.
>>>
>>> I recall reading in the past that if a receive queue fills up on an 82599
>>> , that receiving stalls for all of the other queues and no more packets
>>> can be received. Could that be happening with pktgen? Is there any
>>> debugging I can do to help track it down?
>>
>> I have seen this problem on some platforms a few times and it looks like
>> you may have found a possible solution to the problem. I will have to look
>> into the change and see if this is the problem, but it does seem to
>> suggest this may be the issue. When the port gets into this state the port
>> receives the number mbufs matching the number of descriptors and the rest
>> are ?missed? frames at the wire. The RX counter is the number of missed
>> frames.
>>
>> Thanks for the input
>> ++Keith
>
> I added code to hopefully setup the correct RX/TX conf values. The HEAD of
> the Pktgen-DPDK v2.8.4 should build and work with DPDK 1.8.0 or 2.0.0-rc1.
> I did still see some RX errors and reduced bit rate, but the traffic does
> not stop on my machine. Please give version 2.8.4 a try and let me know if
> you still see problems.
>
> Regards,
> ++Keith
Hi Keith,
Sorry for the delay in responding, I have been out of town.
Thanks for your attention to the problem. I pulled the latest code from git and
moved to the pktgen-2.8.4 tag. I had one issue building:
CC pktgen-port-cfg.o
/root/dpdk/pktgen-dpdk/app/pktgen-port-cfg.c: In function ?pktgen_config_ports?:
/root/dpdk/pktgen-dpdk/app/pktgen-port-cfg.c:300:11: error: variable ?k? set
but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
uint64_t k;
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [pktgen-port-cfg.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make: *** [app] Error 2
I prepended '__attribute__((unused))? to the declaration of k and then I was
able to build successfully. I did not see any receive errors running the
updated binary. So once I got past the initial build problem, the issue seems
to be resolved.
Thanks,
-Matt
