From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com (mail-wm0-f48.google.com [74.125.82.48]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C122BF9 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:21:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id u206so12354560wme.1 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:21:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=G6LxdV49AVQL+tR1w6I4dIFn5o38Svc2K8kT2ftz2JU=; b=bp5KABF+YT5cfPKxBlN98ZbLB4qYcSCLIDf3cnvK778cOpBBhNZYWHToS8HHYqx8AJ pVmDky8iIgGpmEhfYldEAB85B+isotVlEhwXpC+7ngohT25xajJUmbSxg0+K9SJmrHDA ueyhEY7PPmERFyhofAQbqRx+4YssW7YoSO57VeXn25KZFxxa71Kg/Nl93XvW42peYdwQ UKNt0pLTHmoVjdGsH2E2pkJBe/1zqyR3vKAYCuRKSG+qxaVNAjQ65hCnQW5phgm/oUKI 4K41FnuNqw4cdHTIgvUrrfi+mG4WG2xzTamALAXbt6k1uqrrxgRumdW4EFYEAQvnxG01 6fRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=G6LxdV49AVQL+tR1w6I4dIFn5o38Svc2K8kT2ftz2JU=; b=VmC7zQ5IfK1c0CgowqAqenp4Is9Z1f2+YkKF9JHxb8jcfTlK53V73PvXX9fyl78O89 BxMTNC8Rqw3mJG3WvjgucIbhNiRziSHTN7ezhJt1IobG786bggduqshIEzuMcF16w2Ys gzQucpyIEjwjIduAi5Gp8uZUVkcY6Ddku0w0fDlF6hKKCKMRkAedvMa0BMdbZ4fubQbU ZoqSuDG/p69463JVQUr63/oiyV8glYa4VSf1e41H5XWqoQg8UmyHjNJQOrWu/JS5KKW/ cZmXHkSEJBdKhKEEbc76Nk0OF3ZU+P95nnxdO+iXhPY355fhn237Cs6bJo1vjTzerlzT eMVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX7wL4t2ucqSkQeXFo8Nto/8wp9MWhJ8frFcOJ/OY3hzfO4lnjb6PlO9lscoz1UtiCC X-Received: by 10.194.123.102 with SMTP id lz6mr19973432wjb.2.1461309673447; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.16.0.189] (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net. [82.239.227.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u192sm1859481wmd.11.2016.04.22.00.21.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:21:12 -0700 (PDT) To: santosh References: Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" From: Ivan Boule Message-ID: <5719D0DD.6070706@6wind.com> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:21:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbe : query regarding your code changes for VF mac add X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 07:21:13 -0000 Hi Santosh, My job at 6WIND does not consist in answering to DPDK questions. In general, I have other priorities, including vacations... In the meantime, nobody prevents you to add traces in the code to really understand what happens, as suggested in my last answer. Regards, Ivan On 04/21/2016 07:55 AM, santosh wrote: > Hi Ivan and team, > > Please respond to my last mail and let me know if there is any > alternate way to handle this. > Our release is in pending due to this issue. > > > Thanks & Regards > Santosh > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:35 PM, santosh wrote: >> Hi Ivan, >> >> Thanks for your response. >> >> Let me explain you the issue that we are facing on our virtual router >> in VMware environment. >> >> 1. We are using ixgbe driver , SRIOV enabled . >> root@localhost:~# lspci >> .... "Intel Corporation 82599 Ethernet Controller Virtual Function" >> >> 2. "mx86-bgl-1-r1" is our router under testing and R2 is a standard router. >> >> mx86-bgl-1-r1 is connected to R2 >> mx86-bgl-1-r1 (10.1.1.103)------------------>R2(10.1.1.101) >> >> 2. This time ping test passes >> >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# show interfaces >> ge-0/0/0 { >> unit 0 { >> family inet { >> address 10.1.1.103/24; >> } >> } >> } >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run ping 10.1.1.101 >> PING 10.1.1.101 (10.1.1.101): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.980 ms >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.433 ms >> >> >> 3. Default MAC address of interface ge-0/0/0 is as shown below: >> >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run show interfaces ge-0/0/0 extensive | grep current >> Current address: 02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0, Hardware address: 02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0 >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# >> >> >> 4. Now I am changing MAC. Ping works this time also >> >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# set interfaces ge-0/0/0 mac 02:06:0a:0a:ff:f0 >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# commit >> commit complete >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run show interfaces ge-0/0/0 extensive | grep current >> Current address: 02:06:0a:0a:ff:f0, Hardware address: 02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0 >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# show interfaces >> ge-0/0/0 { >> mac 02:06:0a:0a:ff:f0; >> unit 0 { >> family inet { >> address 10.1.1.103/24; >> } >> } >> } >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run ping 10.1.1.101 >> PING 10.1.1.101 (10.1.1.101): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=1.338 ms >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=8.832 ms >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.292 ms >> >> >> 5. I am deleting the above configured MAC. >> In this case newly configured MAC as shown above will be deleted >> and Default MAC (02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0) >> will be applied. Ping fails at this step. "return statement >> added by you is not allowing to configure default MAC. >> >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# delete interfaces ge-0/0/0 mac >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# commit >> commit complete >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# show interfaces >> ge-0/0/0 { >> unit 0 { >> family inet { >> address 10.1.1.103/24; >> } >> } >> } >> >> [edit] >> >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run show interfaces ge-0/0/0 extensive | grep >> current // Displays value from router's local database not from >> NIC. >> Current address: 02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0, Hardware address: 02:06:0a:0e:ff:f0 >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run ping 10.1.1.101 >> PING 10.1.1.101 (10.1.1.101): 56 data bytes >> ^C >> 2 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss >> >> [edit] >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# >> >> >> 7. LOGs: (I have added a debug log just before the return statement >> that you place) >> >> Log o/p in failure case >> .... >> Santosh ixgbevf_add_mac_addr returning >> .... >> >> code changes: >> ----------------------------- >> ixgbevf_add_mac_addr(....) { >> ... >> if (memcmp(hw->mac.perm_addr, mac_addr, sizeof(struct ether_addr)) == 0) { >> PMD_DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "Existing MAC \n"); >> printf("Santosh %s returning \n",__FUNCTION__); >> return; >> } >> >> >> 8. If I remove the above "return" statement, build the driver, loaded >> in router and repeat the steps-2 to steps-5 of MAC add and MAC delete >> on our router then ping passes. >> >> root@mx86-bgl-1-r1# run ping 10.1.1.101 >> PING 10.1.1.101 (10.1.1.101): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=2.356 ms >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.415 ms >> 64 bytes from 10.1.1.101: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.226 ms >> ^C >> --- 10.1.1.101 ping statistics --- >> 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss >> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.226/1.666/2.356/0.494 ms >> >> >> 9. Please let me know whether is it fine to remove that return >> statement added by you in "ixgbevf_add_mac_addr" ? >> >> >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> Santosh >> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:31 AM, Ivan Boule wrote: >>> Hi Santosh, >>> >>> I do not get exactly what you attempt to do on a VF. >>> Are you first deleting the so-called permanent MAC address by a call to the >>> function ixgbevf_remove_mac_addr() ? This operation is not allowed. >>> Can you explain exactly the sequence of operations that are done, so that I >>> can understand how the test (memcmp(hw->mac.perm_addr, mac_addr, >>> sizeof(struct ether_addr)) == 0) in the function ixgbevf_add_mac_addr() >>> prevents them to be successfully performed. >>> >>> Ivan >>> >>> PS : please, can you CC your emails to dev@dpdk.org >>> >>> >>> 2016-04-19 17:01 GMT+02:00 santosh : >>>> >>>> Hi Ivan, >>>> >>>> Your following code changes causing issue in Vmware environment. >>>> >>>> ----------------------------------- ------------------- >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> + /* >>>> + * On a 82599 VF, adding again the same MAC addr is not an idempotent >>>> + * operation. Trap this case to avoid exhausting the [very limited] >>>> + * set of PF resources used to store VF MAC addresses. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (memcmp(hw->mac.perm_addr, mac_addr, sizeof(struct ether_addr)) == 0) >>>> + return; >>>> diag = ixgbevf_set_uc_addr_vf(hw, 2, mac_addr->addr_bytes); >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------------- ------- >>>> >>>> >>>> Issue: >>>> At CLI , we have provision to add /del MAC of an interface. >>>> During MAC delete, existing MAC is deleted and default MAC is applied. >>>> This default MAC is not being applied in VMware environment >>>> successfully due to "return" statement >>>> in your above code changes. As a result traffic is stopped completely. >>>> If I remove above >>>> "return" statement then traffic continues to flow after MAC delete. >>>> >>>> Please let me know your suggestion to handle this scenario . If I >>>> remove "return" what will be the consequences ? >>>> >>>> If removing "return" statement is not good idea then what are other >>>> way to handle MAC delete scenario ? we have only 1 VF per PF in our >>>> setup as of now. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Santosh >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ivan BOULE >>> 6WIND >>> Software Engineer >>> >>> Tel: +33 1 39 30 92 47 >>> Mob: + 33 6 77 25 26 38 >>> Fax: +33 1 39 30 92 11 >>> ivan.boule@6wind.com >>> www.6wind.com >>> Join the Multicore Packet Processing Forum: >>> www.multicorepacketprocessing.com >>> >>> Ce courriel ainsi que toutes les pièces jointes, est uniquement destiné à >>> son ou ses destinataires. Il contient des informations confidentielles qui >>> sont la propriété de 6WIND. Toute révélation, distribution ou copie des >>> informations qu'il contient est strictement interdite. Si vous avez reçu ce >>> message par erreur, veuillez immédiatement le signaler à l'émetteur et >>> détruire toutes les données reçues. >>> >>> This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s) and contains information that is confidential and >>> proprietary to 6WIND. All unauthorized review, use, disclosure or >>> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please >>> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original >>> message. >>> -- Ivan Boule 6WIND Development Engineer