[dpdk-dev] Cannot use MLX4 with igb_uio driver

2017-01-09 Thread Royce Niu
Dear all, I cannot use my Mellanox 3 Pro, after I binded it with igb_uio driver. It always shows when I use my DPDK application. EAL: Detected 32 lcore(s) EAL: Probing VFIO support... PMD: bnxt_rte_pmd_init() called for (null) EAL: PCI device :02:00.0 on NUMA socket 0 EAL: probe driver: 80

Re: [dpdk-dev] Cannot use MLX4 with igb_uio driver

2017-01-09 Thread Royce Niu
e, > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:53:37PM +0800, Royce Niu wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I cannot use my Mellanox 3 Pro, after I binded it with igb_uio driver. > > > > It always shows when I use my DPDK application. > > > > EAL: Detected 32 lcore(s) &g

Re: [dpdk-dev] Cannot use MLX4 with igb_uio driver

2017-01-09 Thread Royce Niu
It is a simple L2FWD. It can be 14mpps in x520 nics. So, do you think where should I check? Thanks On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 at 12:13 AM, Adrien Mazarguil < adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:23:56PM +0800, Royce Niu wrote: > > > Hi, Adrien, > > &g

[dpdk-dev] Why MLX4 can only generate 6Mpp/s (64B pkt) by one core?

2017-01-09 Thread Royce Niu
Dear all, My Mellanox 3 Pro can only generate packet at maximum of 6Mpp/s (64B) by one core. This is too slow for a 40Gbps port. Could anyone give me a hint please? Configuration: Followed: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/mlx4.html 1. install MLNX_OFED_LINUX-3.4-2.0.0.0 2. Added CONFIG_RTE_LIB

[dpdk-dev] Can INTEL XL710-QDA2 achieve line rate for 64B pkt

2017-02-09 Thread Royce Niu
Dear all, Is there anyone using Intel XL710-QDA2? Can it achieve 64B line rate in testpmd? How many cores can achieve the maximum throughput? Thanks. -- Regards, Royce

[dpdk-dev] Why IP_PIPELINE is faster than L2FWD

2016-12-21 Thread Royce Niu
Hi all, I tested default L2FWD and IP_PIPELINE (pass-through). The throughput of IP_PIPELINE is higher immensely. There are only two virtual NICs in KVM. The experiment is just moving packet from vNIC0 to vNIC1. I think the function is so simple. Why L2FWD is much slower? How can I improve L2FW

Re: [dpdk-dev] Why IP_PIPELINE is faster than L2FWD

2016-12-22 Thread Royce Niu
is possible, could you tell me where is the key to boost? Thanks! On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Bruce Richardson < bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:18:12AM +0800, Royce Niu wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I tested default L2FWD and IP_P

Re: [dpdk-dev] Why IP_PIPELINE is faster than L2FWD

2016-12-22 Thread Royce Niu
Dear Bruce, Thanks for your kind explanation. I will try to follow your suggestion and see the source code. On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Bruce Richardson < bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:48:50PM +0800, Royce Niu wrote: > > But, act

Re: [dpdk-dev] Why IP_PIPELINE is faster than L2FWD

2016-12-22 Thread Royce Niu
gt; > > -Original Message- > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Royce Niu > > > Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 9:36 PM > > > To: Richardson, Bruce > > > Cc: Royce Niu ; dev@dpdk.org; Dumitrescu, Cristian > >

[dpdk-dev] A Question on MEMNIC/PMD on DPDK

2016-01-19 Thread Royce Niu
OVS with SR-IOV feature by other ways? Thanks! -- Regards, Royce Niu