On 10/27/2016 12:11 PM, Feng Pan wrote:
I agree with Chris here. I also want to bring Centos into the
conversation, Centos 7.2 ships with QEMU version 1.5.3 by default and
2.3.0 in qemu-ev channel, both of those supported versions in Centos
contain backports from newer releases. I think it would be helpful if
a commit (or set of commits) for upstream qemu can be identified so we
can determine qemu version support in distro.
+1
Thanks,
Feng
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Luke, Chris <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
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:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Pierre
Pfister (ppfister)
*Sent:* Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:49 AM
*To:* Damjan Marion (damarion) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; vpp-dev
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*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
<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)
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 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) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:*Edward Warnicke <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Maciek Konstantynowicz
(mkonstan) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>; Damjan Marion (damarion)
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; vpp-dev
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*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) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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:[email protected]]
*Sent:*Thursday, October 27, 2016 12:35 AM
*To:*Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan)
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:*Peter Mikus -X (pmikus - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at
Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>;
Pierre Pfister (ppfister) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>;[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>; Damjan Marion
(damarion) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; vpp-dev
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*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
<https://jenkins.fd.io/job/vpp-csit-verify-virl-master/1949/consoleFull>
"*14:55:18*+ git clonehttps://gerrit.fd.io/r/csit
<https://gerrit.fd.io/r/csit>--branch oper-161024"
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Maciek
Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Excellent, thanks Ed! And let’s see …
-Maciek
On 26 Oct 2016, at 22:40, Edward Warnicke
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
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) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
//reduced list, updated subject
Peter is right:
https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/2922/16
<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
<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/
<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) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Looks like it is still testing
withoper-161017 not oper-161024.
+ CSIT_BRANCH=oper-161017
+ git clonehttps://gerrit.fd.io/r/csit
<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)
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:*Andrew Theurer
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Douglas
Shakshober <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Damjan
Marion (damarion) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Bill
Michalowski <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; vpp-dev
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Rashid
Khan <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>;[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>;[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>; Edward
Warnicke <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Thomas F
Herbert <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*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
<https://jenkins.fd.io/job/vpp-csit-verify-virl-master/1937/console>
Are you sure you updated qemu ?
Thanks,
- Pierre
_______________________________________________
csit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev
<https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev>
_______________________________________________
csit-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev
<https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev>
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
<https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev>
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
--
*Thomas F Herbert*
SDN Group
Office of Technology
*Red Hat*
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
