Hi Alexander,
I am also wondering like Olivier ? yours is a nice testcase and setup, hence
requesting the information below instead of spending a lot of time reinventing
the test case at my end.
If you have the time on your side, it would be interesting to know what is the
number of packets per
Thanks for the quick reply. I saw some definitions of e1000_phy_82579 hence
I thought (hoped) the NIC would be supported. I will try to run my dpdk app
inside a VM with an emulated e1000 NIC (just to test the code ..).
Thanks
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Cyril Cressent wrote:
> On Tue, No
Thank you,
I've actually read the code & guide, but I wanted to make sure that what I
understood was correct.
Cheers,
Pepe
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Cyril Cressent wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 06:15:01PM +0800, Jose Gavine Cueto wrote:
> >
> > When using *static int rte_ring_dequeue(
Hi,
When using *static int rte_ring_dequeue( structe rte_ring * r, void **
obj_p )*, is the user presumed to allocate obj_p , or does this method
allocates this obj_p ?
Cheers,
Pepe
--
To stop learning is like to stop loving.
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:47:13AM +0800, Jose Gavine Cueto wrote:
> Your'e welcome, and by the way the multiprocess example of simple_mp seems
> confusing here:
>
> static int
> lcore_recv(__attribute__((unused)) void *arg)
> {
> unsigned lcore_id = rte_lcore_id();
>
> printf("Starting core %u\
Hello
I'm trying to install DPDK on my laptop.
I have 82579LM NIC which i'm trying to bind to the igb_uio driver. I get
the following error
# ./tools/pci_unbind.py --status
Network devices using IGB_UIO driver
Network devices using kernel driver
==
My test is almost same with Alexander. But we only use one rx queue.
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Original message
From: Prashant Upadhyaya
Date: 11/05/2013 6:41 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Alexander Belyakov ,Olivier MATZ
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Surprisingly high TC
Dear Thomas,
Thank you that really was the problem. I am still puzzled why it
happend, since the headers were installed before. I will update the rest
of installations.
Probably it would be slightly better to check whether the build folder
contains the right Makefiles and scripts needed to pri
Hello Dmitry,
> Documentation for rte_ring says: the ring implementation is not
> preemptable. A lcore must not be interrupted by another task that uses
> the same ring. What does it precisely mean? Must all the producers and
> consumers be non-preemptive?
The "non-preemptive" constraint mean
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:01:06PM +0530, Jyotiswarup Raiturkar wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply. I saw some definitions of e1000_phy_82579 hence
> I thought (hoped) the NIC would be supported. I will try to run my dpdk app
> inside a VM with an emulated e1000 NIC (just to test the code ..).
A
Hello,
The role of RSC is to reassemble input TCP segments, so it is possible
> that the number of TCP packets sent to the DPDK is lower but some
> packets may contain more data. Can you confirm that?
>
>
I don't think out test case can answer your question, because all generated
TCP ACK packets w
Hi Marc,
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:53:29PM +0100, Marc Sune wrote:
>
> I think it is not this variable. When the folder
> /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build does not exist, the Makefile
> properly warns you (I manually created it, since it was not existing
> during the first compilation attemp
Hello,
Documentation for rte_ring says: the ring implementation is not
preemptable. A lcore must not be interrupted by another task that uses
the same ring. What does it precisely mean? Must all the producers and
consumers be non-preemptive? Can we relax that restriction somehow? Say,
can I ha
Hello,
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Prashant Upadhyaya <
prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com> wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> Please confirm if the patch works for you.
>
Disabling RSC (DPDK 1.3) indeed brings ACK flood forwarding performance to
14,5+ Mpps. No negative side affects were discovered s
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:41:17PM +0530, Jyotiswarup Raiturkar wrote:
>
> I have 82579LM NIC which i'm trying to bind to the igb_uio driver. I get
> the following error
I can't find the 82579LM listed on
http://dpdk.org/doc/nics
or in
lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_pci_dev_ids.h
My guess is
05/11/2013 11:33, Cyril Cressent :
> On a side note, it looks like the API reference page for rte_ring.h is
> broken? It's missing a lot of functions. I'll look into it if I get a
> chance.
> http://dpdk.org/doc/api/rte__ring_8h.html#func-members
It is fixed by the patch I just sent. Thanks for re
Ignore __attribute__ because it was wrongly parsed as an identifier.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon
---
doc/doxy-api.conf |4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/doc/doxy-api.conf b/doc/doxy-api.conf
index 7ea692a..749db78 100644
--- a/doc/doxy-api.conf
+++ b/doc/doxy-api.conf
Hi,
> Disabling RSC (DPDK 1.3) indeed brings ACK flood forwarding
> performance to 14,5+ Mpps. No negative side affects were discovered
> so far, but we're still testing.
The role of RSC is to reassemble input TCP segments, so it is possible
that the number of TCP packets sent to the DPDK is l
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 06:15:01PM +0800, Jose Gavine Cueto wrote:
>
> When using *static int rte_ring_dequeue( structe rte_ring * r, void **
> obj_p )*, is the user presumed to allocate obj_p , or does this method
> allocates this obj_p ?
This method doesn't allocate anything ; you have to alloc
19 matches
Mail list logo
