> On 06.05.2022., at 11:33, Xu, Ting <ting...@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi, Damjan > > I look into the code. The bad commit is > ce4083ce48958d9d3956e8317445a5552780af1a (“dpdk: offloads cleanup”), and the > previous commit is correct, so I compare these two. Since they use the same > DPDK version, I check the input of rte API. > > I find that the direct cause is configuring default RSS in DPDK. It is called > by dpdk_device_setup() in dpdk plugins, the API function is > rte_eth_dev_configure(). However, the bad commit and the good commit have > almost the same input to rte_eth_dev_configure(), the only difference is a Tx > offload flag (TX_IPV4_CSUM), but I think it is not the root cause because it > does not help after I fix it. Since they have the same input to dpdk API, I > think it is not DPDK's issue. > > I find there are a lot of flags or offloads configuring change in commit > (“dpdk: offloads cleanup”). I guess is it possible that some flags are not > correct? I look at the code in dpdk_lib_init(), but do not find the cause yet. > > Do you have any suggestion to me? Thanks!
No. DPDK should not crash even if we are doing something wrong. It should return error value. — Damjan
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#21396): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/21396 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/89520993/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
