I do agree. I actually just realized there is *another* bug. Which appears with qemu 2.5 (not rc0, not rc1, but the real 2.5 release). So I am working it out. For some reason VPP is getting 0 from recvmsg, which seems to mean that the socket was closed by qemu.
Let's see... Le 27 oct. 2016 à 16:24, Luke, Chris <chris_l...@comcast.com<mailto:chris_l...@comcast.com>> a écrit : Wait, you’re saying software people aren’t very good at documentation? Say it ain’t so! In any case, I echo Damjan’s sentiment; Just to publicly air my end user oriented opinion: it’s important to minimize the variables to get VPP going; that means it has to work with whatever QEMU/KVM Ubuntu 16.04 ships with. I may elect to improve things with a newer version but it is also important to me that it Just Works otherwise. Chris. From: csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io> [mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Pierre Pfister (ppfister) Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:49 AM To: Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com<mailto:damar...@cisco.com>> Cc: csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>> Subject: Re: [csit-dev] vhost multi-queue patch - verify job failing I think I have a fix. I mean... I re-interprated some text from vhost-user.txt... Reverse engineered DPDK's implementation... Looked at qemu messages... And tried to find a way to make it work. It looks like the first ring pair is supposed to be enabled by default... Well. I don't know if it is supposed to. But qemu 2.5 does not enable ring 1 (it does enable ring 0). So I am not sure either qemu 2.5 or DPDK is right. But it looks like it works. Let's see if it actually does... https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/2922/18..20/vnet/vnet/devices/virtio/vhost-user.c You know. That's really when you get to like IETF's specifications. virtio specs, and vhost-user specs even more, are so ambiguous. vhost-user.txt is in a git repository and subject to changes. I mean... Seriously. I wish so hard virtio 1.1 will be a reboot of all this madness. - Pierre Le 27 oct. 2016 à 12:23, Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com<mailto:damar...@cisco.com>> a écrit : Yes, we should not break QEMU 2.5 compatibility, specially if that version is default version provided in ubuntu 16.04. IMO we need to test both with 2.5 and 2.7 as long as ubuntu 16.04 is in game. My understanding so far was that this is only "2.5-RC1" issue. On 27 Oct 2016, at 09:56, Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>> wrote: I would leave decision to community. By merge this patch basically vhost-user on Qemu 2.5 would be failing - maybe some disclaimer should be made or what about backward compatibility? Peter Mikus Engineer – Software Cisco Systems Limited Planned absence: 28.10., 1.11., 17.11., 9.12., 19.-31.12. From: Pierre Pfister (ppfister) Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 9:27 AM To: Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>> Cc: Edward Warnicke <hagb...@gmail.com<mailto:hagb...@gmail.com>>; Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkons...@cisco.com<mailto:mkons...@cisco.com>>; csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io>; Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com<mailto:damar...@cisco.com>>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>> Subject: Re: [csit-dev] vhost multi-queue patch - verify job failing Oh. Just notices you merged. I actually merged and pushed too... So a new test is started. Will probably fail. Ideal Qemu would be 2.7. 2.5 is *old*. And the failing qemu was 2.5-rc1. Anything above 2.5-rc1 should be good. - Pierre Le 27 oct. 2016 à 07:36, Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>> a écrit : Hi, Taking look. Yes it is using correct latest branch and Qemu 2.5.0 which is default version of 16.04.1LTS (Debian 1:2.5+dfsg-5ubuntu10.5). As still failing, there is question which Qemu version is specifically required (I do not see it in the comments of patch) or if the patch itself is working. Peter Mikus Engineer – Software Cisco Systems Limited Planned absence: 28.10., 1.11., 17.11., 9.12., 19.-31.12. From: Edward Warnicke [mailto:hagb...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 12:35 AM To: Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkons...@cisco.com<mailto:mkons...@cisco.com>> Cc: Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>>; Pierre Pfister (ppfister) <ppfis...@cisco.com<mailto:ppfis...@cisco.com>>; csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io>; Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com<mailto:damar...@cisco.com>>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>> Subject: Re: [csit-dev] vhost multi-queue patch - verify job failing Still failing, but apparently now using the correct CSIT branch: https://jenkins.fd.io/job/vpp-csit-verify-virl-master/1949/consoleFull "14:55:18 + git clone https://gerrit.fd.io/r/csit --branch oper-161024" On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkons...@cisco.com<mailto:mkons...@cisco.com>> wrote: Excellent, thanks Ed! And let’s see … -Maciek On 26 Oct 2016, at 22:40, Edward Warnicke <hagb...@gmail.com<mailto:hagb...@gmail.com>> wrote: Maciek, Looks like the patch was based at a point in the past that was pointing to the old CSIT branch. I rebased the patch, so hopefully it will now pick up the correct CSIT branch. Ed On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkons...@cisco.com<mailto:mkons...@cisco.com>> wrote: //reduced list, updated subject Peter is right: https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/2922/16 looking at the last failed job - https://jenkins.fd.io/job/vpp-csit-verify-virl-master/1940/consoleFull - it's using old csit branch - "CSIT_BRANCH=oper-161017", without ubuntu1604, so pointless. you should rebase to pick up this commit https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/3553/ that's updating to latest csit branch oper-161024. -Maciek On 26 Oct 2016, at 10:06, Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>> wrote: Looks like it is still testing with oper-161017 not oper-161024. + CSIT_BRANCH=oper-161017 + git clone https://gerrit.fd.io/r/csit --branch oper-161017 Can you please use the latest one (code rebase)? Thanks. Peter Mikus Engineer – Software Cisco Systems Limited Planned absence: 28.10., 1.11., 17.11., 9.12., 19.-31.12. From: Pierre Pfister (ppfister) Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 10:52 AM To: Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <pmi...@cisco.com<mailto:pmi...@cisco.com>> Cc: Andrew Theurer <atheu...@redhat.com<mailto:atheu...@redhat.com>>; Douglas Shakshober <dsh...@redhat.com<mailto:dsh...@redhat.com>>; Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com<mailto:damar...@cisco.com>>; Bill Michalowski <bmich...@redhat.com<mailto:bmich...@redhat.com>>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>>; Rashid Khan <rk...@redhat.com<mailto:rk...@redhat.com>>; kris...@redhat.com<mailto:kris...@redhat.com>; csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io>; Edward Warnicke <hagb...@gmail.com<mailto:hagb...@gmail.com>>; Thomas F Herbert <therb...@redhat.com<mailto:therb...@redhat.com>> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] updated ovs vs. vpp results for 0.002% and 0% loss The recheck failed. https://jenkins.fd.io/job/vpp-csit-verify-virl-master/1937/console Are you sure you updated qemu ? Thanks, - Pierre _______________________________________________ csit-dev mailing list csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev _______________________________________________ csit-dev mailing list csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
