Hi, One more finding related to intel nic and number of buffers (537600) vpp branch driver card buffers Traffic Err stable/1908 uio_pci_genric X722(10G) 537600 Working *stable/1908* *vfio-pci* *XL710(40G)* *537600 * *Not Working* *l3 mac mismatch* stable/2001 uio_pci_genric X722(10G) 537600 Working stable/2001 vfio-pci XL710(40G) 537600 Working
Thanks, Chetan On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 7:17 PM chetan bhasin via Lists.Fd.Io <chetan.bhasin017=gmail....@lists.fd.io> wrote: > Hi Nitin, > > https://github.com/FDio/vpp/commits/stable/2001/src/vlib > As per stable/2001 branch , the given change is checked-in around Oct 28 > 2019. > > df0191ead2cf39611714b6603cdc5bdddc445b57 is previous commit of > b6e8b1a7c8bf9f9fbd05cdc3c90111d9e7a6897? > Yes (branch vpp 20.01) > > Thanks, > Chetan Bhasin > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 5:33 PM Nitin Saxena <nsax...@marvell.com> wrote: > >> Hi Damjan, >> >> >> if you read Chetan’s email bellow, you will see that this one is >> already excluded… >> Sorry I missed that part. After seeing diffs between stable/1908 and >> stable/2001, commit: b6e8b1a7c8bf9f9fbd05cdc3c90111d9e7a6897 is the only >> visible git commit in dpdk plugin which is playing with mempool buffers. If >> it does not solve the problem then I suspect problem lies outside dpdk >> plugin. I am guessing DPDK-19.08 is being used here with VPP-19.08 >> >> Hi Chetan, >> > > 3) I took previous commit of "vlib: don't use vector for keeping >> buffer >> > indices in the pool " ie "df0191ead2cf39611714b6603cdc5bdddc445b57" : >> > Everything looks fine with Buffers 537600. >> In which branch, Commit: df0191ead2cf39611714b6603cdc5bdddc445b57 is >> previous commit of b6e8b1a7c8bf9f9fbd05cdc3c90111d9e7a6897? >> >> Thanks, >> Nitin >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Damjan Marion <dmar...@me.com> >> > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 3:47 PM >> > To: Nitin Saxena <nsax...@marvell.com> >> > Cc: chetan bhasin <chetan.bhasin...@gmail.com>; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io >> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [vpp-dev] Regarding buffers-per-numa parameter >> > >> > >> > Dear Nitin, >> > >> > if you read Chetan’s email bellow, you will see that this one is already >> > excluded… >> > >> > Also, it will not be easy to explain how this patch blows tx function >> in dpdk >> > mlx5 pmd… >> > >> > — >> > Damjan >> > >> > > On 17 Feb 2020, at 11:12, Nitin Saxena <nsax...@marvell.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Prashant/Chetan, >> > > >> > > I would try following change first to solve the problem in 1908 >> > > >> > > commit b6e8b1a7c8bf9f9fbd05cdc3c90111d9e7a6897b >> > > Author: Damjan Marion <damar...@cisco.com> >> > > Date: Tue Mar 12 18:14:15 2019 +0100 >> > > >> > > vlib: don't use vector for keeping buffer indices in >> > > >> > > Type: refactor >> > > >> > > Change-Id: I72221b97d7e0bf5c93e20bbda4473ca67bfcdeb4 >> > > Signed-off-by: Damjan Marion damar...@cisco.com >> > > >> > > You can also try copying src/plugins/dpdk/buffer.c from stable/2001 >> > branch to stable/1908 >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Nitin >> > > >> > > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Damjan >> > Marion via Lists.Fd.Io >> > > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 1:52 PM >> > > To: chetan bhasin <chetan.bhasin...@gmail.com> >> > > Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io >> > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [vpp-dev] Regarding buffers-per-numa parameter >> > > >> > > External Email >> > > >> > > On 17 Feb 2020, at 07:37, chetan bhasin <chetan.bhasin...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Bottom line is stable/vpp 908 does not work with higher number of >> buffers >> > but stable/vpp2001 does. Could you please advise which area we can look >> at >> > ,as it would be difficult for us to move to vpp2001 at this time. >> > > >> > > I really don’t have idea what caused this problem to disappear. >> > > You may try to use “git bisect” to find out which commit fixed it…. >> > > >> > > — >> > > Damjan >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:01 AM chetan bhasin via Lists.Fd.Io >> > <chetan.bhasin017=gmail....@lists.fd.io> wrote: >> > > Thanks Damjan for the reply! >> > > >> > > Following are my observations on Intel X710/XL710 pci- >> > > 1) I took latest code base from stable/vpp19.08 : Seeing error as " >> > ethernet-input l3 mac mismatch" >> > > With Buffers 537600 >> > > vpp# show buffers >> > | >> > > Pool Name Index NUMA Size Data Size Total Avail >> Cached Used >> > > default-numa-0 0 0 2496 2048 537600 510464 >> 1319 25817 >> > > default-numa-1 1 1 2496 2048 537600 528896 >> 390 8314 >> > > >> > > vpp# show hardware-interfaces >> > > Name Idx Link Hardware >> > > BondEthernet0 3 up BondEthernet0 >> > > Link speed: unknown >> > > Ethernet address 3c:fd:fe:b5:5e:40 >> > > FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/0 1 up >> FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/0 >> > > Link speed: 40 Gbps >> > > Ethernet address 3c:fd:fe:b5:5e:40 >> > > Intel X710/XL710 Family >> > > carrier up full duplex mtu 9206 >> > > flags: admin-up pmd rx-ip4-cksum >> > > rx: queues 16 (max 320), desc 1024 (min 64 max 4096 align 32) >> > > tx: queues 16 (max 320), desc 4096 (min 64 max 4096 align 32) >> > > pci: device 8086:1583 subsystem 8086:0001 address 0000:12:00.00 >> numa >> > 0 >> > > max rx packet len: 9728 >> > > promiscuous: unicast off all-multicast on >> > > vlan offload: strip off filter off qinq off >> > > rx offload avail: vlan-strip ipv4-cksum udp-cksum tcp-cksum >> qinq-strip >> > > outer-ipv4-cksum vlan-filter vlan-extend >> jumbo-frame >> > > scatter keep-crc >> > > rx offload active: ipv4-cksum >> > > tx offload avail: vlan-insert ipv4-cksum udp-cksum tcp-cksum >> sctp-cksum >> > > tcp-tso outer-ipv4-cksum qinq-insert >> vxlan-tnl-tso >> > > gre-tnl-tso ipip-tnl-tso geneve-tnl-tso >> multi-segs >> > > mbuf-fast-free >> > > tx offload active: none >> > > rss avail: ipv4-frag ipv4-tcp ipv4-udp ipv4-sctp >> ipv4-other ipv6-frag >> > > ipv6-tcp ipv6-udp ipv6-sctp ipv6-other >> l2-payload >> > > rss active: ipv4-frag ipv4-tcp ipv4-udp ipv4-other >> ipv6-frag ipv6-tcp >> > > ipv6-udp ipv6-other >> > > tx burst function: i40e_xmit_pkts_vec_avx2 >> > > rx burst function: i40e_recv_pkts_vec_avx2 >> > > tx errors 17 >> > > rx frames ok 4585 >> > > rx bytes ok 391078 >> > > extended stats: >> > > rx good packets 4585 >> > > rx good bytes 391078 >> > > tx errors 17 >> > > rx multicast packets 4345 >> > > rx broadcast packets 243 >> > > rx unknown protocol packets 4588 >> > > rx size 65 to 127 packets 4529 >> > > rx size 128 to 255 packets 32 >> > > rx size 256 to 511 packets 26 >> > > rx size 1024 to 1522 packets 1 >> > > tx size 65 to 127 packets 33 >> > > FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/1 2 up >> FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/1 >> > > Link speed: 40 Gbps >> > > Ethernet address 3c:fd:fe:b5:5e:40 >> > > Intel X710/XL710 Family >> > > carrier up full duplex mtu 9206 >> > > flags: admin-up pmd rx-ip4-cksum >> > > rx: queues 16 (max 320), desc 1024 (min 64 max 4096 align 32) >> > > tx: queues 16 (max 320), desc 4096 (min 64 max 4096 align 32) >> > > pci: device 8086:1583 subsystem 8086:0000 address 0000:12:00.01 >> numa >> > 0 >> > > max rx packet len: 9728 >> > > promiscuous: unicast off all-multicast on >> > > vlan offload: strip off filter off qinq off >> > > rx offload avail: vlan-strip ipv4-cksum udp-cksum tcp-cksum >> qinq-strip >> > > outer-ipv4-cksum vlan-filter vlan-extend >> jumbo-frame >> > > scatter keep-crc >> > > rx offload active: ipv4-cksum >> > > tx offload avail: vlan-insert ipv4-cksum udp-cksum tcp-cksum >> sctp-cksum >> > > tcp-tso outer-ipv4-cksum qinq-insert >> vxlan-tnl-tso >> > > gre-tnl-tso ipip-tnl-tso geneve-tnl-tso >> multi-segs >> > > mbuf-fast-free >> > > tx offload active: none >> > > rss avail: ipv4-frag ipv4-tcp ipv4-udp ipv4-sctp >> ipv4-other ipv6-frag >> > > ipv6-tcp ipv6-udp ipv6-sctp ipv6-other >> l2-payload >> > > rss active: ipv4-frag ipv4-tcp ipv4-udp ipv4-other >> ipv6-frag ipv6-tcp >> > > ipv6-udp ipv6-other >> > > tx burst function: i40e_xmit_pkts_vec_avx2 >> > > rx burst function: i40e_recv_pkts_vec_avx2 >> > > rx frames ok 4585 >> > > rx bytes ok 391078 >> > > extended stats: >> > > rx good packets 4585 >> > > rx good bytes 391078 >> > > rx multicast packets 4344 >> > > rx broadcast packets 243 >> > > rx unknown protocol packets 4587 >> > | >> > > rx size 65 to 127 packets 4528 >> > > rx size 128 to 255 packets 32 >> > > rx size 256 to 511 packets 26 >> > > rx size 1024 to 1522 packets 1 >> > > tx size 65 to 127 packets 33 >> > > >> > > >> > > As per packet trace - >> > > Packet 4 >> > > 00:00:54:955863: dpdk-input >> > > FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/0 rx queue 0 >> > > buffer 0x13fc728: current data 0, length 68, buffer-pool 0, >> ref-count 1, >> > totlen-nifb 0, trace handle 0x1000003 >> > > ext-hdr-valid >> > | >> > > l4-cksum-computed l4-cksum-correct >> > > PKT MBUF: port 0, nb_segs 1, pkt_len 68 >> > > buf_len 2176, data_len 68, ol_flags 0x180, data_off 128, phys_addr >> > 0xde91ca80 >> > > packet_type 0x1 l2_len 0 l3_len 0 outer_l2_len 0 outer_l3_len 0 >> > > rss 0x0 fdir.hi 0x0 fdir.lo 0x0 >> > > Packet Offload Flags >> > > PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_GOOD (0x0080) IP cksum of RX pkt. is valid >> > > PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD (0x0100) L4 cksum of RX pkt. is valid >> > > Packet Types >> > > RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER (0x0001) Ethernet packet >> > > 0x0000: 00:00:00:00:00:00 -> 00:00:00:00:00:00 >> > > 00:00:54:955864: bond-input >> > > src 00:00:00:00:00:00, dst 00:00:00:00:00:00, >> FortyGigabitEthernet12/0/0 - >> > > BondEthernet0 >> > > 00:00:54:955864: ethernet-input >> > > 0x0000: 00:00:00:00:00:00 -> 00:00:00:00:00:00 >> > > 00:00:54:955865: error-drop >> > > rx:BondEthernet0 >> > > 00:00:54:955865: drop >> > > ethernet-input: l3 mac mismatch >> > > >> > > 2) I have took latest code-base from stable/vpp2001 branch: Everything >> > looks fine with Buffers 537600 >> > > >> > > 3) I took previous commit of "vlib: don't use vector for keeping >> buffer >> > indices in the pool " ie "df0191ead2cf39611714b6603cdc5bdddc445b57" : >> > Everything looks fine with Buffers 537600. >> > > So this cleary shows the above commit will not fix our problem. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Chetan >> > > >> > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 9:07 PM Damjan Marion <dmar...@me.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Shouldn’t be too hard to checkout commit prior to that one and test if >> > problem is still there… >> > > >> > > — >> > > Damjan >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On 12 Feb 2020, at 14:50, chetan bhasin <chetan.bhasin...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Looking into the changes in vpp 20.1 , the below change looks good >> > important related to buffer indices . >> > > >> > > vlib: don't use vector for keeping buffer indices in the pool >> > > Type: refactor >> > > >> > > Change-Id: I72221b97d7e0bf5c93e20bbda4473ca67bfcdeb4 >> > > Signed-off-by: Damjan Marion <damar...@cisco.com> >> > > >> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >> > 3A__github.com_FDio_vpp_commit_b6e8b1a7c8bf9f9fbd05cdc3c90111d9e7 >> > a6897b-23diff- >> > 2D2260a8080303fbcc30ef32f782b4d6df&d=DwIFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz >> > 7xtfQ&r=S4H7jibYAtA5YOvfL3IkGduCfk9LbZMPOAecQGDzWV0&m=IYJSlvQW >> > nHZRFb7PgVq0RR9rayZkIR_eLIsg4QLU3VU&s=82mrobM4Iis3mDVPbnr526Wv >> > 1yxa4TtVoa-WH8oCguI&e= >> > > >> > > Can anybody suggest ? >> > > Shouldn’t be too hard to checkout commit prior to that one and test if >> > problem is still there… >> > > >> > > — >> > > Damjan >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#15437): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/15437 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/71346533/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
