Hi,
Is it possible for two or more processes to share the same mbuf_pool in
SR-IOV with single rx/tx queue?
char *eal_argv[] = {"fakeelf",
"-c2",
"-n4",
"--proc-type=primary",};
int ret = rte_eal_init(4, eal_argv);
Hi,
We are seeing assertion failure in bnx2x with DPDK example code.
[root at VM ~]# ./symmetric_mp fakeelf -c 2 -m2048 -n2 --proc-type=secondary
-- -p 3 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=1
[.]
[.]
EAL: PCI device :0b:00.0 on NUMA socket 0
EAL: probe driver: 14e4:168e rte_bnx2x_pmd
EAL: PCI me
Hi,
We wanted to use 10400 bytes size of each rte_mbuf to enable Jumbo frames.
Do you guys see any problem with that? Would all the drivers like ixgbe,
i40e, vmxnet3, virtio and bnx2x work with larger rte_mbuf size?
We would want to avoid detailing with chained mbufs.
/Saurabh
is not able to send the packets --
rte_eth_tx_burst() succeed but recipient does not receive the packet.
Thanks,
/Saurabh
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Bruce Richardson <
bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 08:35:20PM -0800, Saurabh Mishra wrote:
> > Hi,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Masaru OKI
>> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 2:41 PM
>> To: Saurabh Mishra; users at dpdk.org; dev at dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte
Copying the data into a larger buffer will definitely cause the application
> to be slower.
>
> Lawrence
>
>
> This one time (01/26/2016 09:40 AM), at band camp, Saurabh Mishra wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Since we do full content inspection, we will end up coalescing mbuf chai
Looks like bnx2x has link problem?sometime it sees link up and most of the
time it see link down even though the RX/TX counters are going up.
Has anybody seen this type of problem? If I don't use DPDK then I don't see
this type of link related problem.
The counter shows that it?s receiving and tr
On Jan 26, 2016 12:19 PM, "Bruce Richardson"
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:15:28PM -0800, Saurabh Mishra wrote:
> > Hi Bruce --
> >
> > >The sharing of the mbuf pool is not an issue, but sharing of rx/tx
> queues
> > is.
> > >The ethdev
Has anybody seen this before? What's the workaround or fix? We are using
dpdk-2.2.0 on KVM centos:
Host PF version: 1.0.11-k on Centos7
[root@ ~]# ./symmetric_mp fakeelf -c 2 -m2048 -n4 --proc-type=primary -- -p
3 --num-procs=2 --proc-id=0
[.]
EAL: Virtual area found at 0x7fff7580 (size =
Hi,
We are planning to support virtio, vmxnet3, ixgbe, i40e, bxn2x and SR-IOV
on some of them with DPDK.
We have seen that even if we give correct number of mbufs given the number
hugepages reserved, rte_eth_tx_queue_setup() may still fail with no enough
memory (I saw this on i40evf but worked on
ed when boot up.
>
> Hope it works for you.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
>
> On 1/30/2016 4:35 AM, Saurabh Mishra wrote:
> > Has anybody seen this before? What's the workaround or fix? We are using
> > dpdk-2.2.0 on KVM centos:
> >
> > Host PF version
8 :82:00.0 ixgbe Up 1Mbps Full 00:1b:21:90:f9:f8
1500 Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection
[root] ethtool -i vmnic6
driver: i40e
version: 1.3.38
firmware-version: 4.41 0x80001866 16.5.20
bus-info: :07:00.0
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Saurabh Mis
Hi, on KVM system, after doing NVM upgrade to new firmware and I don't
see init_adminq
failed messages.
Thanks,
/Saurabh
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Saurabh Mishra
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So I tried to update the firmware and it says "Update not available" for
> i40
Is there any way to enable multi-queue for SR-IOV of ixgbe?
I've seen that PF driver automatically disables multi-queue when VFs are
created from host.
We want to use multiple queues with DPDK in case of ixgbevf too.
[781203.692378] ixgbe :06:00.0: Multiqueue Disabled: Rx Queue count =
1, Tx
gt; Regards,
> Choi, Sy Jong
> Platform Application Engineer
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Saurabh Mishra
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 3:47 AM
> To: dev at dpdk.org; users at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] DPD
Hi,
I'm seeing two problems:
1) when use our kernel '3.10.88-8.0.0.0.6', we only receive first packet
but not subsequent ones at all after that. However, when I use centos7.0,
then l2fwd is able to receive all the packets.
2) I've also seen that on centos7.0, symmetric_mp itself is not working.
eck?
>
> Thanks
> Qian
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Saurabh Mishra
> Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2016 6:33 AM
> To: dev at dpdk.org; users at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] DPDK i40evf problem in receving packet
>
>
Hi Qian --
Any suggestions? This is bit urgent.
/Saurabh
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Saurabh Mishra
wrote:
> Hi Qian --
>
>
> Here's the data from Host:
>
> [root at oscompute3 ~]# ethtool -i p3p1
>
> driver: i40e
>
> version: 1.0.11-k
>
> firm
ctly prohibited. If you have received this
> communication
> > in error, please delete it and email confirmation to the sender. Thank
> You.*
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Saurabh Mishra >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Qian --
> &
19 matches
Mail list logo