> -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit at intel.com] > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 10:55 AM > To: Wiles, Keith; Mussar, Gary > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_kni.ko with lo_mode=lo_mode_ring > > On 9/2/2016 3:16 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > HI Gary, > > > > Regards, > > Keith > > > >> On Sep 2, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Mussar, Gary <gmussar at ciena.com> wrote: > >> > >> The pktgen docs state that the rte_kni.ko should be loaded with > lo_mode=lo_mode_ring however the source in dpdk master does not appear to > understand this value. This wasn't an issue in the past since the kni code > would > simply disable lo_mode if you passed in an unknown value. > >> > >> The Ubuntu 4.4.0-36-generic kernel no longer loads the module if the passed > value is not in the table of known values (the 4.4.0-34-generic kernel would > still > load the module). > >> > >> I have 2 questions: > >> 1) > >> Why does pktgen specify using a value for lo_mode that the source does not > support? Is lo_mode_ring something that is coming but not yet submitted? > > > > The KNI support and kernel module is more of a DPDK issue then Pktgen, which > is the application on top of DPDK. I do not know the reason lo_mode_ring is > not > working correctly. Look in the Maintainers file and see who maintains the KNI > code. > > "lo_mode_ring" is not supported loopback mode, supported ones are: > lo_mode_none > lo_mode_fifo > lo_mode_fifo_skb > > Please point the document with incorrect usage.
The files with the incorrect usage are: pktgen-dpdk/README.md pktgen-dpdk/setup.sh > > > > >> > >> 2) > >> Is the Ubuntu kernel being over aggressive in parameter checking or is > >> this a > "good" thing? If it is good, then should the pktgen docs be indicating that an > unsupported value be used for lo_mode? > > > > I assume the Ubuntu Kernel is attempting to protect itself. Each time the > kernel is updated it is a good think to recompile DPDK and the KNI kernel > module > or the module may not load because of a version mis-match. > > Yes this looks like the issue, > instead of kernel version or parameter protection, kernel-module version > mismatch. Please re-compile kni module. Recompiling the kni module makes it happier. Thanks. > > > > >> > >> Gary > > >
