[vpp-dev] vpp crashes on deleting route 0.0.0.0/0 via interface #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread elantsev . s
Hello Everyone! I've encountered an issue with deleting route to 0.0.0.0/0 via some virtual interface: vpp crashed with a SIGABRT. This issue can be reproduced with gre interface on the current master 1c6486f7b8a00a1358d5c8f4ea1d874073bbcd6c: ``` DBGvpp# ip table add 10 DBGvpp# create gre

Re: [vpp-dev] (Vpp 19,08)Facing issue with vmxnet3 with 1rx/tx queue

2020-01-13 Thread chetan bhasin
Thanks Benoit! I will try the above mentioned steps. I am not sure why it works fine with 2Rx and 2Tx queue configuration GigabitEthernet13/0/0 1 up GigabitEthernet13/0/0 Link speed: 10 Gbps Ethernet address 00:50:56:9b:f5:c5 VMware VMXNET3 carrier up full duplex

Re: [vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp?

2020-01-13 Thread Neale Ranns via Lists.Fd.Io
From: on behalf of "rya...@yunify.com" Date: Tuesday 14 January 2020 at 14:07 To: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io" Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp? Hi Neale, Thanks for answer. Another question: If I remove the l3

Re: [vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp?

2020-01-13 Thread ryanlu
Hi Neale, Thanks for answer. Another question: If I remove the l3 interface directly, the num in  " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]" *won't* decrease. If I remove the l3 interface from vrf, the num in  " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]" *will* decrease. Does this imply the correct api sequence should be "removing

Re: [vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp?

2020-01-13 Thread Neale Ranns via Lists.Fd.Io
Hi Ryan, It’s probably a sign that you have bound multiple interfaces to that table : set int ip table And you need to unbind them (or bind them back to the default table) all before deleting the table : set int ip table 0 regards, neale From: on behalf of "rya...@yunify.com" Date:

Re: [vpp-dev] (Vpp 19,08)Facing issue with vmxnet3 with 1rx/tx queue

2020-01-13 Thread chetan bhasin
Hi Benoit, Thanks for your prompt response. We are migrating from vpp 18.01 to vpp.19.08 , that's why we want least modification in our build system and we want to use DPDK as we were using earlier . DBGvpp# show log 2020/01/13 14:44:42:014 notice dhcp/clientplugin initialized

Re: [vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP

2020-01-13 Thread Ahmed Bashandy
Thanks a lot Ahmed From: Matthew Smith Date: Monday, January 13, 2020 at 8:20 AM To: "Jerome Tollet (jtollet)" Cc: Ahmed Bashandy , vpp-dev Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP Netgate has a plugin which adds VRRPv3 support to VPP. We plan to submit it in gerrit in the next month

Re: [vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP

2020-01-13 Thread Matthew Smith via Lists.Fd.Io
Netgate has a plugin which adds VRRPv3 support to VPP. We plan to submit it in gerrit in the next month or two. On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 4:27 AM Jerome Tollet via Lists.Fd.Io wrote: > > Of course, contributions are more than welcome in case you’d like to work > on VRRP for VPP. > > > Netgate has

Re: [vpp-dev] (Vpp 19,08)Facing issue with vmxnet3 with 1rx/tx queue

2020-01-13 Thread Benoit Ganne (bganne) via Lists.Fd.Io
Hmm, - I suppose you run VPP as root and not in a container - if you use CentOS/RHEL can you check disabling SELinux ('setenforce 0') - can you share the output of Linux dmesg and VPP 'show pci' Best ben > -Original Message- > From: chetan bhasin > Sent: lundi 13 janvier 2020 15:51

[vpp-dev] Coverity run FAILED as of 2020-01-13 14:00:24 UTC

2020-01-13 Thread Noreply Jenkins
Coverity run failed today. Current number of outstanding issues are 2 Newly detected: 0 Eliminated: 0 More details can be found at https://scan.coverity.com/projects/fd-io-vpp/view_defects -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#15147):

Re: [vpp-dev] (Vpp 19,08)Facing issue with vmxnet3 with 1rx/tx queue

2020-01-13 Thread Benoit Ganne (bganne) via Lists.Fd.Io
Hi Chetan, Any reason for not using VPP built-in vmxnet3 driver instead of DPDK? That should give you better performance and would be easier for us to debug. See https://docs.fd.io/vpp/20.01/d2/d1a/vmxnet3_doc.html Otherwise, can you share 'show logging' output? Ben > -Original

[vpp-dev] (Vpp 19,08)Facing issue with vmxnet3 with 1rx/tx queue

2020-01-13 Thread chetan bhasin
Hello Everyone, I am facing an issue while bringing up vpp with *less than 2 rx and 2 tx queue*. I am using vpp19.08. I have configured pci's under the dpdk section like below - 1) dpdk { # dpdk-config dev default { num-rx-desc 1024 num-rx-queues 1 num-tx-desc 1024 num-tx-queues 1 #

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Ole Troan
Aleksander, > Sorry, you are absolutely right. It's no issues here. In my VPP v19.08-stable > I have no commit 75761b93. Thanks, that was good to hear! Best regards, Ole -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#15144):

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Aleksander Djuric
Sorry, you are absolutely right. It's no issues here. In my VPP v19.08-stable I have no commit 75761b93. Thanks! Aleksander -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#15143): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/15143 Mute This Topic:

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Ole Troan
Hi Aleksander, > Yes. This fix still needed. Please take a look at the test below: > > > import ipaddress > > ipaddress.IPv4Network((u'192.168.0.222', 24), False) > IPv4Network(u'192.168.0.0/24') > > The IPv4Network method should not be used here, because in functions like an >

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Aleksander Djuric
Yes. This fix still needed. Please take a look at the test below: > import ipaddress > ipaddress.IPv4Network(( u'192.168.0.222' , 24 ), False ) IPv4Network(u'192.168.0.0/24') The IPv4Network method should not be used here, because in functions like an  ip_address_dump or ip_route_dump we expect

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Aleksander Djuric
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 01:20 PM, Ole Troan wrote: > > would you mind elaborating why you want the Python representation of an IP > prefix to be a dictionary of address and length as opposed to an > IPv6Network/IPv4Network object? Hi Ole! Thanks! It's strange, but the IPv[46]Network method

[vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp?

2020-01-13 Thread ryanlu
Hi guys , I have a question when I delete 'ip table'/'vrf' within VPP. It need issue multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp. The number decided by num in " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]" For example, with follow 'ip table'/'vrf', I need issue " ip table del

Re: [vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP

2020-01-13 Thread Jerome Tollet via Lists.Fd.Io
Hello Ahmed, The presentation you are referring to is about networking-vpp (OpenStack driver). It’s not about VPP in itself. * Networking-vpp supports HA mode with VRRP for VPP using keepalived * We currently have no plan to add support for VRRP Of course, contributions are more than

Re: [vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Ole Troan
Hi Aleksander, > 3) vpp_papi: correct unformat ip address for ip_address_dump, ip_route_dump, > etc (unformat-api-prefix.patch) would you mind elaborating why you want the Python representation of an IP prefix to be a dictionary of address and length as opposed to an IPv6Network/IPv4Network

[vpp-dev] Set of the small bug-fixes for #vpp

2020-01-13 Thread Aleksander Djuric
Hello Everyone, I have a small set of the fixes for VPP, but unfortunatelly right now, I have no time for pushing the code with git review. I hope that these fixes are very useful for the project and I would be very happy if someone could do it instead of me. In any case I hope that these fixes

[vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP

2020-01-13 Thread Ahmed Bashandy
Hi Slide 34 in the presentation https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/m/en_us/service-provider/ciscoknowledgenetwork/files/0531-techad-ckn.pptx says “support for HA (VRRP based)“ But when I searched the mailing I found