Hi Jakub,
Sorry for the duplicate mail.
On 7/14/2025 8:36 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 14: 50: 05 +0530 Malladi, Meghana wrote: > > AF_XDP
performance using 64 byte packets in Kpps. > > Benchmark: XDP-SKB XDP-
Native XDP-Native(ZeroCopy) > > rxdrop 317 504 824 > > txonly 400 405 757 >
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This message was sent from outside of Texas Instruments.
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the source
of this email and know the content is safe.
Report Suspicious
<https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/G3vK!
uDdqXRfP1m37CoZlPNNDnQgOintsvKy-
cENuCwB1b5Qxa66rT1SFJDmyny6jsjalW7Wur6ukCSGrdQ$>
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 14:50:05 +0530 Malladi, Meghana wrote:
> AF_XDP performance using 64 byte packets in Kpps.
> Benchmark: XDP-SKB XDP-Native XDP-Native(ZeroCopy)
> rxdrop 317 504 824
> txonly 400 405 757
> l2fwd 207 264 0
>
> AF_XDP performance using 1500 byte packets in Kpps.
> Benchmark: XDP-SKB XDP-Native XDP-Native(ZeroCopy)
> rxdrop 82 82 82
> txonly 82 82 82
> l2fwd 82 82 82
>
> [1]: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/xdp-project/bpf-examples/
tree/master/AF_XDP-example__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-
X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3d9m40aZg$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/xdp-project/bpf-examples/tree/master/AF_XDP-example__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3d9m40aZg$>
>
> To:
>
> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rog...@kernel.org>
This series crashes Linux on am64xx-hsevm, when I tried nfs boot using
AM65-CPSW-NUSS driver:
logs:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gist.github.com/MeghanaMalladiTI/
d655a1c8ca88113ee7f5f57d6ab0ec4c__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-
X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3ecuWN_dw$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gist.github.com/MeghanaMalladiTI/d655a1c8ca88113ee7f5f57d6ab0ec4c__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3ecuWN_dw$>
Seems like you have reverted the fix for the same bug which was reported
by Siddharth and fixed by Julien:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/
all/7f7fb71a-6d15-46f1-b63c-b569a2e23...@baylibre.com/__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-
bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3exh7VnCw$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/7f7fb71a-6d15-46f1-b63c-b569a2e23...@baylibre.com/__;!!G3vK!Sv1p-bFPBDlzD-YMO2sjo-X2gv3CW5uHD_O771StRVzMR8Vr75k7tTGQJ27MRy_fz3exh7VnCw$>
reverted lines:
if (!common->ports[port].ndev)
/* FIXME should we BUG here? */
continue;
Can you please take a look at it.
Just to be clear -- you're reporting this problem to Roger so that its
fixed before the series is reposted? I don't see this in the tree, I
wanted to make sure it's not something I need to track as a regression.
Yes you are right. This isn't a regression, I reported this as part of
my testing for this RFC patch series.
--
Thanks,
Meghana Malladi
