Hi all,
There was an older thread on this (
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/users/2018-May/003123.html) and the response
was to recompile the host PF driver.
Is there another method to do this now? Is a recompilation of the host
driver still needed or can we configure it some other way? The guest
Hi, Guys.
I am using the latest version on git, and there are problems compiling the
sources under FreeBSD 9.2, is this expected ?
Sincerely,
Fred Pedrisa
on git, and there are problems compiling the
> sources under FreeBSD 9.2, is this expected ?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Fred Pedrisa
>
Hi,
I've added : hw.nic_uio.bdfs="3:0:0,3:0:1,4:0:0,4:0:1" to my
/boot/loader.conf in FreeBSD
However, once the nic_uio is loaded, it takes all the ports to itself, how
can I solve this ?
dev.nic_uio.7.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x10d6 subvendor=0x8086
subdevice=0x145a class=0x02
dev.nic_uio.7.%parent: pci8
What am I doing wrong in this case ?
I noticed that if we use : sysctl -a the variable : hw.nic_uio.bdfs is not
present there, is this some red flag ?
Sincerely,
Fred
Hi, guys.
This variable is not working as intended for FreeBSD :(
It does not dettach nic_uio from the wanted ports :/
stratosphere.co.jp]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 03:16
Para: Fred Pedrisa
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: Re: [dpdk-dev] hw.nic_uio.bdfs
Hi,
I tried with Intel version 1.6.0 and FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE on VMware Player.
kldload nic_uio by hand, works fine.
But kldunload nic_uio only detach uio
Hello,
By default nic_uio takes all the NICs for itself
So in theory, you needed an option to reserve some NIC ports to your system,
without DPDK taking it for itself
De: Masaru Oki [mailto:m-oki at stratosphere.co.jp]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 03:43
Para: Fred
j].dev) {
device_detach(dev);
}
}
}
}
}
}
I think it looks better this way.
-Mensagem original-
De: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] Em nome de Fred Pedrisa
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 03:50
Par
Hello,
Yes, I am writing a fix for this too ;)
De: Masaru Oki [mailto:m-oki at stratosphere.co.jp]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 04:08
Para: Fred Pedrisa
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: Re: [dpdk-dev] hw.nic_uio.bdfs
> By default nic_uio takes all the NICs for itself
or(dev) == devices[i].vend &&
pci_get_device(dev) == devices[i].dev) {
device_set_desc(dev, "Intel(R) DPDK PCI Device");
return (BUS_PROBE_SPECIFIC);
}
return (ENXIO);
}
Now it is working as inte
Oh, don't forget to make :
static char bdf_str[1024];
Anywhere in the nic_uio.c file, so this way the other methods can check the
content :-)
And remove the local declaration from nic_uio_load.
-Mensagem original-
De: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] Em nome de Fred Pe
Hi,
I am testing l2fwd in FreeBSD and I am noticing a delay of around 0~3
seconds, what could be causing this behavior ?
Fred
=128 time=3654 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.249: icmp_seq=985 ttl=128 time=2654 ms
However, this is what happens :-(
-Mensagem original-
De: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] Em nome de Fred Pedrisa
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 20:34
Para: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: [dpdk-dev
Hello,
I see, but even making it?s value as 1, still doesn?t help ? :/
De: Masaru Oki [mailto:m-oki at stratosphere.co.jp]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 23:18
Para: Fred Pedrisa
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: Re: [dpdk-dev] RES: l2fwd high latency/delay
there is problem in
-bounces at dpdk.org] Em nome de Fred Pedrisa
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 23:27
Para: 'Masaru Oki'
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: [dpdk-dev] RES: RES: l2fwd high latency/delay
Hello,
I see, but even making it?s value as 1, still doesn?t help ? :/
De: Masaru Oki [mailt
es at dpdk.org] Em nome de Fred Pedrisa
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 26 de mar?o de 2014 23:55
Para: 'Masaru Oki'
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: [dpdk-dev] RES: RES: RES: l2fwd high latency/delay
Hello,
Also the same problem happens with : testpmd
64 bytes from 192.168.2.81: icmp_seq=1612 ttl=6
Hello,
Im my first attempt, I had to restart the server :D
-Mensagem original-
De: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] Em nome de Randall Stewart
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 27 de mar?o de 2014 08:26
Para: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: Re: [dpdk-dev] Attempting to get the DPDK to build for Free
Hello,
It just requires a small code change :), and it can work in the expected
way.
So you mean bdfs is to 'select' the only wanted devices yes ? May I change
my code proposition for you ?
Sincerely,
Fred Pedrisa
-Mensagem original-
De: Carew, Alan [mailto:alan.carew at
Hi !
I've attached my contribution (the fixed source) by changing the behavior
the way Alan wanted :)
It is working and if you like to use it, this would be cool.
Sincerely,
Fred Pedrisa
-Mensagem original-
De: Fred Pedrisa [mailto:fredhps10 at hotmail.com]
Enviada em: quinta-
Hi, guys.
What is the expected performance using a 2650 (2.0ghz) per core ? In terms
of packet forwarding with a 82599 ?
- Small 64b packets ?
- Large 1540b packets ?
Sincerely,
Fred
Hello,
Ok, but the current dpdk code (1.6.0 r0) for FreeBSD is achieving this
current performance ?
Sincerely,
Fred Pedrisa
-Mensagem original-
De: Jayakumar, Muthurajan [mailto:muthurajan.jayakumar at intel.com]
Enviada em: domingo, 30 de mar?o de 2014 19:27
Para: Fred Pedrisa; dev
.
Sincerely,
Fred
De: Vladimir Medvedkin [mailto:medvedkinv at gmail.com]
Enviada em: ter?a-feira, 1 de abril de 2014 13:36
Para: Fred Pedrisa
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Assunto: Re: [dpdk-dev] L2FWD uses 'too much' CPU
Hi,
One of the objectives of DPDK is avoiding of interrupts, so a
you might use :
http://webchat.freenode.net and join the ##dpdk channel J
Sincerely,
Fred Pedrisa
Hi,
Why by default L2FWD saturate both cores ? I mean, it seems it keeps wasting
cycles due to the infinite loop placed there to check the queues.
Which would be the way to improve this and make it to become more efficient
?
Sincerely,
Fred
25 matches
Mail list logo
