er things, I have noted that RTE_PMD_BNX2X_TX_MAX_BURST is
> defined to be 1. This bursts single packets to bnx2x_tx_encap() but it
> looks like bnx2x_tx_encap() is far more capable than that.
>
> On Tue, 2015-12-22 at 14:52 +0300, Alexander Belyakov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
>
,
Alexander Belyakov
Hello,
I have got my hands on Intel? Ethernet Server Bypass Adapter X540-T2
(device_id 0x155C, copper). Unfortunately the only bypass device currently
supported by DPDK is 0x155D (fiber).
Does anyone know about the plans of adding 0x155C support?
Thank you,
Alexander Belyakov
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Alexander Belyakov
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Alexander Belyakov
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 7:21 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
>> pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Alexander Belyakov
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 7:21 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
> pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Alexander Belyakov
>>
>> >
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 7:21 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Alexander Belyakov
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hi Pablo,
>
> >
>
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Alexander Belyakov
wrote:
>
> Hi Pablo,
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:22 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
> pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alexander,
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> >
Hello,
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 5:49 AM, ??? wrote:
> 65 bytes frame may degrade performace a lot.Thats related to DMA and cache.
> When NIC dma packets to memory, NIC has to do read modify write if DMA
> size is partial cache line.So for 65 bytes, the first 64 bytes are ok. The
> next 1 byte
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Stephen Hemminger <
stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 13:17:48 +0300
> Alexander Belyakov wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > recently I have found a case of significant performance degradation for
&g
Hi Pablo,
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:22 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo <
pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belyakov
> > Sent: Monday, January
(X520LR2BP).
Is anyone aware of such strange behavior?
Regards,
Alexander Belyakov
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Surya Nimmagadda wrote:
> I am seeing the following error when doing make with 1.5.0r2 or 1.5.1r1
>
> == Build lib/librte_meter
> == Build lib/librte_sched
> CC rte_sched.o
> In file included from
>
Hello,
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Prashant Upadhyaya <
prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com> wrote:
> 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
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
de
scaling).
> Regards
> -Prashant
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belyakov
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 1:51 AM
> To: Wang, Shawn
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Surprisingly
issue in this case.
>
> Regards
> -Prashant
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belyakov
> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2013 7:13 PM
> To: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Surprisingly high TCP ACK p
_FCTRL_PMCF;
> IXGBE_WRITE_REG(hw, IXGBE_FCTRL, fctrl);
>
> + /* Disable RSC */
> + RTE_LOG(INFO, PMD, "Disable RSC\n");
> + rfctl = IXGBE_READ_REG(hw, IXGBE_RFCTL);
> + rfctl |= IXGBE_RFCTL_RSC_DIS;
> + IXGBE_WRITE_REG(hw, IXGBE_RFCTL
17 matches
Mail list logo
