[dpdk-dev] Defining multiple actions based on a field value for the same table lookup in ip_pipeline application

[dpdk-dev] Defining multiple actions based on a field value for the same table lookup in ip_pipeline application

[Nidhia Varghese]

Hi all,

I am trying to design a pipeline where the table lookup has to do the
actions as follows:

Lookup hit -> FWD to port
Lookup miss -> add a table entry if incoming port was 1
                         drop if incoming port was 2

Is it possible to do such an implementation using ip_pipeline application?
If so, how can I do that?

Thanks for your reply and help.

Thanks,
Nidhia Varghese

Re: [dpdk-dev] Defining multiple actions based on a field value for the same table lookup in ip_pipeline application

[Shyam Shrivastav]

For each table a lookup hit and miss function can be registered, have a
look at
rte_pipeline_run(struct rte_pipeline *p) for the semantics

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Nidhia Varghese <nidhiavarghese93@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to design a pipeline where the table lookup has to do the
> actions as follows:
>
> Lookup hit -> FWD to port
> Lookup miss -> add a table entry if incoming port was 1
>                          drop if incoming port was 2
>
> Is it possible to do such an implementation using ip_pipeline application?
> If so, how can I do that?
>
> Thanks for your reply and help.
>
> Thanks,
> Nidhia Varghese
>

Re: [dpdk-dev] Defining multiple actions based on a field value for the same table lookup in ip_pipeline application

[Nidhia Varghese]

Thanks for your reply Shyam.
Yes, I went through it. But my doubt is whether it is possible to define
two different miss actions based on some decision criteria(input port in my
case).
Miss ->Case 1: Add entry to table if portid = 1
        ->Case 2: Drop if portid = 2

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Shyam Shrivastav <
shrivastav.shyam@gmail.com> wrote:

> For each table a lookup hit and miss function can be registered, have a
> look at
> rte_pipeline_run(struct rte_pipeline *p) for the semantics
>

Thanks,
Nidhia Varghese

Re: [dpdk-dev] Defining multiple actions based on a field value for the same table lookup in ip_pipeline application

[Shyam Shrivastav]

That can be done in the same miss function as I understand, if (condition1)
{} else {}

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Nidhia Varghese <
nidhiavarghese93@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for your reply Shyam.
> Yes, I went through it. But my doubt is whether it is possible to define
> two different miss actions based on some decision criteria(input port in my
> case).
> Miss ->Case 1: Add entry to table if portid = 1
>         ->Case 2: Drop if portid = 2
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Shyam Shrivastav <
> shrivastav.shyam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> For each table a lookup hit and miss function can be registered, have a
>> look at
>> rte_pipeline_run(struct rte_pipeline *p) for the semantics
>>
>
> Thanks,
> Nidhia Varghese
>

[dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.

[vuonglv]

Hi DPDK team,
Sorry when I send this email to both of group users and dev. But I have 
big problem: Rx core on my application can not receive anymore packet 
after I did the stress test to it (~1 day Rx core received ~ 1.5 billion 
packet). Rx core still alive but didn't receive any packet and didn't 
generate any log. Below is my system configuration:
- OS: CentOS 7
- Kernel: 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64
- Huge page: 32G: 16384 page 2M
- NIC card: Intel 85299
- DPDK version: 16.11
- Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring 
----- Worker (lcore 2) dequeue packet in the ring and free it (use 
rte_pktmbuf_free() function).
- Mempool create: rte_pktmbuf_pool_create (
                                          "rx_pool",                  /* 
name */
                                          8192,                     /* 
number of elemements in the mbuf pool */
256,                                            /* Size of per-core 
object cache */
0,                                                 /* Size of 
application private are between rte_mbuf struct and data buffer */
                                          RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, /* 
Size of data buffer in each mbuf (2048 + 128)*/
0                                                   /* socket id */
                             );
If I change "number of elemements in the mbuf pool" from 8192 to 512, Rx 
have same problem after shorter time (~ 30s).

Please tell me if you need more information. I am looking forward to 
hearing from you.


Many thanks,
Vuong Le

Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.

[Dumitrescu, Cristian]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of
> vuonglv@viettel.com.vn
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:04 AM
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
> billion packet.
> 
> Hi DPDK team,
> Sorry when I send this email to both of group users and dev. But I have
> big problem: Rx core on my application can not receive anymore packet
> after I did the stress test to it (~1 day Rx core received ~ 1.5 billion
> packet). Rx core still alive but didn't receive any packet and didn't
> generate any log. Below is my system configuration:
> - OS: CentOS 7
> - Kernel: 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64
> - Huge page: 32G: 16384 page 2M
> - NIC card: Intel 85299
> - DPDK version: 16.11
> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
> ----- Worker (lcore 2) dequeue packet in the ring and free it (use
> rte_pktmbuf_free() function).
> - Mempool create: rte_pktmbuf_pool_create (
>                                           "rx_pool",                  /*
> name */
>                                           8192,                     /*
> number of elemements in the mbuf pool */
> 256,                                            /* Size of per-core
> object cache */
> 0,                                                 /* Size of
> application private are between rte_mbuf struct and data buffer */
>                                           RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, /*
> Size of data buffer in each mbuf (2048 + 128)*/
> 0                                                   /* socket id */
>                              );
> If I change "number of elemements in the mbuf pool" from 8192 to 512, Rx
> have same problem after shorter time (~ 30s).
> 
> Please tell me if you need more information. I am looking forward to
> hearing from you.
> 
> 
> Many thanks,
> Vuong Le

Hi Vuong,

This is likely to be a buffer leakage problem. You might have a path in your code where you are not freeing a buffer and therefore this buffer gets "lost", as the application is not able to use this buffer any more since it is not returned back to the pool, so the pool of free buffers shrinks over time up to the moment when it eventually becomes empty, so no more packets can be received.

You might want to periodically monitor the numbers of free buffers in your pool; if this is the root cause, then you should be able to see this number constantly decreasing until it becomes flat zero, otherwise you should be able to the number of free buffers oscillating around an equilibrium point.

Since it takes a relatively big number of packets to get to this issue, it is likely that the code path that has this problem is not executed very frequently: it might be a control plane packet that is not freed up, or an ARP request/reply pkt, etc.

Regards,
Cristian

Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.

[vuonglv]

On 07/17/2017 05:31 PM, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of
>> vuonglv@viettel.com.vn
>> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:04 AM
>> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
>> billion packet.
>>
>> Hi DPDK team,
>> Sorry when I send this email to both of group users and dev. But I have
>> big problem: Rx core on my application can not receive anymore packet
>> after I did the stress test to it (~1 day Rx core received ~ 1.5 billion
>> packet). Rx core still alive but didn't receive any packet and didn't
>> generate any log. Below is my system configuration:
>> - OS: CentOS 7
>> - Kernel: 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64
>> - Huge page: 32G: 16384 page 2M
>> - NIC card: Intel 85299
>> - DPDK version: 16.11
>> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
>> ----- Worker (lcore 2) dequeue packet in the ring and free it (use
>> rte_pktmbuf_free() function).
>> - Mempool create: rte_pktmbuf_pool_create (
>>                                            "rx_pool",                  /*
>> name */
>>                                            8192,                     /*
>> number of elemements in the mbuf pool */
>> 256,                                            /* Size of per-core
>> object cache */
>> 0,                                                 /* Size of
>> application private are between rte_mbuf struct and data buffer */
>>                                            RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, /*
>> Size of data buffer in each mbuf (2048 + 128)*/
>> 0                                                   /* socket id */
>>                               );
>> If I change "number of elemements in the mbuf pool" from 8192 to 512, Rx
>> have same problem after shorter time (~ 30s).
>>
>> Please tell me if you need more information. I am looking forward to
>> hearing from you.
>>
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Vuong Le
> Hi Vuong,
>
> This is likely to be a buffer leakage problem. You might have a path in your code where you are not freeing a buffer and therefore this buffer gets "lost", as the application is not able to use this buffer any more since it is not returned back to the pool, so the pool of free buffers shrinks over time up to the moment when it eventually becomes empty, so no more packets can be received.
>
> You might want to periodically monitor the numbers of free buffers in your pool; if this is the root cause, then you should be able to see this number constantly decreasing until it becomes flat zero, otherwise you should be able to the number of free buffers oscillating around an equilibrium point.
>
> Since it takes a relatively big number of packets to get to this issue, it is likely that the code path that has this problem is not executed very frequently: it might be a control plane packet that is not freed up, or an ARP request/reply pkt, etc.
>
> Regards,
> Cristian
Hi Cristian,
Thanks for your response, I am doing your ideal. But let me show you 
another case i have tested before. I changed architecture of my 
application as below:
- Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring 
----- after that: Rx (lcore 1) dequeue packet in the ring and free it 
immediately.
(old architecture as above)
With new architecture Rx still receive packet after 2 day and everything 
look good.  Unfortunately, My application must run in old architecture.

Any ideal for me?


Many thanks,
Vuong Le

Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.

[Dumitrescu, Cristian]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: vuonglv@viettel.com.vn [mailto:vuonglv@viettel.com.vn]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 2:37 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
> billion packet.
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/17/2017 05:31 PM, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of
> >> vuonglv@viettel.com.vn
> >> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:04 AM
> >> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
> >> billion packet.
> >>
> >> Hi DPDK team,
> >> Sorry when I send this email to both of group users and dev. But I have
> >> big problem: Rx core on my application can not receive anymore packet
> >> after I did the stress test to it (~1 day Rx core received ~ 1.5 billion
> >> packet). Rx core still alive but didn't receive any packet and didn't
> >> generate any log. Below is my system configuration:
> >> - OS: CentOS 7
> >> - Kernel: 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64
> >> - Huge page: 32G: 16384 page 2M
> >> - NIC card: Intel 85299
> >> - DPDK version: 16.11
> >> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
> >> ----- Worker (lcore 2) dequeue packet in the ring and free it (use
> >> rte_pktmbuf_free() function).
> >> - Mempool create: rte_pktmbuf_pool_create (
> >>                                            "rx_pool",                  /*
> >> name */
> >>                                            8192,                     /*
> >> number of elemements in the mbuf pool */
> >> 256,                                            /* Size of per-core
> >> object cache */
> >> 0,                                                 /* Size of
> >> application private are between rte_mbuf struct and data buffer */
> >>                                            RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, /*
> >> Size of data buffer in each mbuf (2048 + 128)*/
> >> 0                                                   /* socket id */
> >>                               );
> >> If I change "number of elemements in the mbuf pool" from 8192 to 512,
> Rx
> >> have same problem after shorter time (~ 30s).
> >>
> >> Please tell me if you need more information. I am looking forward to
> >> hearing from you.
> >>
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >> Vuong Le
> > Hi Vuong,
> >
> > This is likely to be a buffer leakage problem. You might have a path in your
> code where you are not freeing a buffer and therefore this buffer gets
> "lost", as the application is not able to use this buffer any more since it is not
> returned back to the pool, so the pool of free buffers shrinks over time up to
> the moment when it eventually becomes empty, so no more packets can be
> received.
> >
> > You might want to periodically monitor the numbers of free buffers in your
> pool; if this is the root cause, then you should be able to see this number
> constantly decreasing until it becomes flat zero, otherwise you should be
> able to the number of free buffers oscillating around an equilibrium point.
> >
> > Since it takes a relatively big number of packets to get to this issue, it is
> likely that the code path that has this problem is not executed very
> frequently: it might be a control plane packet that is not freed up, or an ARP
> request/reply pkt, etc.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Cristian
> Hi Cristian,
> Thanks for your response, I am doing your ideal. But let me show you
> another case i have tested before. I changed architecture of my
> application as below:
> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
> ----- after that: Rx (lcore 1) dequeue packet in the ring and free it
> immediately.
> (old architecture as above)
> With new architecture Rx still receive packet after 2 day and everything
> look good.  Unfortunately, My application must run in old architecture.
> 
> Any ideal for me?
> 
> 
> Many thanks,
> Vuong Le

I am not sure I understand the old architecture and the new architecture you are referring to, can you please clarify them.

Regards,
Cristian

Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.

[vuonglv]

----- Original Message -----
From: "cristian dumitrescu" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
To: vuonglv@viettel.com.vn
Cc: users@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 1:43:37 AM
Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5 billion packet.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: vuonglv@viettel.com.vn [mailto:vuonglv@viettel.com.vn]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 2:37 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
> billion packet.
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/17/2017 05:31 PM, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of
> >> vuonglv@viettel.com.vn
> >> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:04 AM
> >> Cc: users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Rx Can't receive anymore packet after received 1.5
> >> billion packet.
> >>
> >> Hi DPDK team,
> >> Sorry when I send this email to both of group users and dev. But I have
> >> big problem: Rx core on my application can not receive anymore packet
> >> after I did the stress test to it (~1 day Rx core received ~ 1.5 billion
> >> packet). Rx core still alive but didn't receive any packet and didn't
> >> generate any log. Below is my system configuration:
> >> - OS: CentOS 7
> >> - Kernel: 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64
> >> - Huge page: 32G: 16384 page 2M
> >> - NIC card: Intel 85299
> >> - DPDK version: 16.11
> >> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
> >> ----- Worker (lcore 2) dequeue packet in the ring and free it (use
> >> rte_pktmbuf_free() function).
> >> - Mempool create: rte_pktmbuf_pool_create (
> >>                                            "rx_pool",                  /*
> >> name */
> >>                                            8192,                     /*
> >> number of elemements in the mbuf pool */
> >> 256,                                            /* Size of per-core
> >> object cache */
> >> 0,                                                 /* Size of
> >> application private are between rte_mbuf struct and data buffer */
> >>                                            RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, /*
> >> Size of data buffer in each mbuf (2048 + 128)*/
> >> 0                                                   /* socket id */
> >>                               );
> >> If I change "number of elemements in the mbuf pool" from 8192 to 512,
> Rx
> >> have same problem after shorter time (~ 30s).
> >>
> >> Please tell me if you need more information. I am looking forward to
> >> hearing from you.
> >>
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >> Vuong Le
> > Hi Vuong,
> >
> > This is likely to be a buffer leakage problem. You might have a path in your
> code where you are not freeing a buffer and therefore this buffer gets
> "lost", as the application is not able to use this buffer any more since it is not
> returned back to the pool, so the pool of free buffers shrinks over time up to
> the moment when it eventually becomes empty, so no more packets can be
> received.
> >
> > You might want to periodically monitor the numbers of free buffers in your
> pool; if this is the root cause, then you should be able to see this number
> constantly decreasing until it becomes flat zero, otherwise you should be
> able to the number of free buffers oscillating around an equilibrium point.
> >
> > Since it takes a relatively big number of packets to get to this issue, it is
> likely that the code path that has this problem is not executed very
> frequently: it might be a control plane packet that is not freed up, or an ARP
> request/reply pkt, etc.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Cristian
> Hi Cristian,
> Thanks for your response, I am doing your ideal. But let me show you
> another case i have tested before. I changed architecture of my
> application as below:
> - Architecture: Rx (lcore 1) received packet then queue to the ring
> ----- after that: Rx (lcore 1) dequeue packet in the ring and free it
> immediately.
> (old architecture as above)
> With new architecture Rx still receive packet after 2 day and everything
> look good.  Unfortunately, My application must run in old architecture.
> 
> Any ideal for me?
> 
> 
> Many thanks,
> Vuong Le

I am not sure I understand the old architecture and the new architecture you are referring to, can you please clarify them.

Regards,
Cristian



Hi Cristain,
I have found my problem, It caused by I created mempool in socket 1 while I created ring in socket 0 (I have not set huge page for socket 0).
This is my stupid mistake. But I don't understand why rings still created by system in socket 0 where I didn't set huge page before.

Thanks for your support.

Many thanks,
Vuong Le