Thanks very much... Dave
From: Tina Tsou
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 1:51 PM
To: Dave Barach (dbarach)
Cc: Brian Brooks ; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
Subject: Re: Manual patch verify request: gerrit 13769
Dear Dave,
Looking into it...
Thank you,
Tina
On Jul 27, 2018, at 7:23 AM, Dave Barach (dbarach
Thank you Dave, I am adding Lijian from ARM to look into this.
I have added him to the gerrit review as well.
From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io On Behalf Of Dave Barach via
Lists.Fd.Io
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 9:23 AM
To: Tina Tsou ; Brian Brooks
Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
Subject: [vpp-dev] Manual pa
Hello,
Ø What is the “significant problem” you’re running into?
The problem can be better described as: When python is spawning N instances of
VPP process, all processes are from unknown reason placed with affinity 0x2
(bin 10). This can be verified by taskset –p . CFS is then placing all
VP
Dear Dave,
Looking into it...
Thank you,
Tina
On Jul 27, 2018, at 7:23 AM, Dave Barach (dbarach)
mailto:dbar...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Folks,
Would it be possible for someone to download and manually verify that
https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/13769 is functionally correct, and that the proposed
ch
Alec, This is about make test and not real packet forwarding. Per Juraj’s patch
[1]
Juraj, My understanding is that if you’re starting VPP without specifying core
placement in startup.conf [2] cpu {..}, then Linux CFS will be placing the
threads onto available cpu core resources. If you’re sayi
Hi Juraj,
How many instances and what level of performance are you looking at?
Even if you assign different cores to each VPP instance, results can be skewed
due to interference at the LLC and PCIe/NIC level (this can be somewhat
mitigated by running on separate sockets)
Alec
From: on beha
Hi Maciek and vpp-devs,
I've run into a significant problem regarding VPP assignment to cores. All VPPs
that are spawned are assigned to core 1. I looked at
https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/Command-line_Arguments and I guess it's because
that's the default behavior of VPP (dpdk coremask is not confi
Folks,
Would it be possible for someone to download and manually verify that
https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/13769 is functionally correct, and that the proposed
change isn't a performance disaster on aarch64?
Thanks... Dave
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group
Just wanted to confirm that the last patches for ecmp ip4 and ip6 tests
got merged [1]. With this VIRL P0 [2] test migration to VPP make test is
completed.
Ed, per discussion on last Tue vpp-dev call, you may want to disable
vpp-csit-verify-virl-master [3] voting on VPP patches.
-Maciek
[1] http
Hi all,
I used gdb to trace tx procedure, but it returned at "return ops->enqueue(mp,
obj_table, n)", did not go deep anymore.
This the error drop node procedure.
Below is stack info.
dpdk_rte_pktmbuf_free (b=, vm=) at
/home/vbras/pack/VBRASV100R001_new_trunk/vpp1704/build-data/../src/plugins
Hi Ray,
It seems that it does not work, but I am not about that, please check this for
me.
VPP.mk:
vpp_uses_external_dpdk = yes
vpp_dpdk_inc_dir = /usr/include/dpdk
vpp_dpdk_lib_dir = /usr/lib
# vpp_dpdk_shared_lib = yes
DPDK:
export
RTE_SDK=/home/vbras/pack/VBRASV100R001_new_trunk/vpp1704/dp
11 matches
Mail list logo