From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CBCA04F1; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:14:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170A51BFB6; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:14:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ua1-f49.google.com (mail-ua1-f49.google.com [209.85.222.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95FE31BFB5 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:14:44 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ua1-f49.google.com with SMTP id w20so693224uap.1 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 08:14:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=seagroup-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=FpP50DR/nV6vmg3WpXZOKUTvpW/URdqeik3R+hCT8D4=; b=CSHc1MFGkTW77P2gG3HPZhWGpmuKVVhjtvlfjR03J7iPkdnrOwsM3WtlizxWWmlOJf NF2BfqCmzzZ3QplCk99d/w1lhSPyJWVtT4hCMx1x7pUf+fX4EnMJpIcofm0SiLdpMJp2 MoWBak/E+kJoXo8O8gXePEe5jmHfeOV6tWfENCmFmJfopWSMSKiVmBktVXSA8QNmOQ6Q UHH+2A3AqRtPMVmZhKQ2Ye45s+WyLsBBYFtLkw+GqCjjT9lRDeiTpw+nooRf0B9h0u/J jEUu9V4N5c11D0J4DAattkV8/KISLFXuPh8gwyiD+YbNUoaMDoMEV1VnR+Hr60VQFVgG 5HYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=FpP50DR/nV6vmg3WpXZOKUTvpW/URdqeik3R+hCT8D4=; b=Ihf+QHLwrKyCiSChnExyuIvmK6mYd5hCiFkiXpinm18a6pTaDXE77KKG4rtT57w840 OdaAstN3ri6sUPNLxxV4H3SUrD3uo+R46cPEZEsbba1uT9JK219KPkyuZTKWKXshxSjr HQj06wBbwauDNEaIiQFGckU/uRF5VD81RxkRue3XjfcVSmxM1/9RYv2p44uCYQLqW9J6 hk+tnObRLDK93+2puoJQHIKvNvcGtlGSBF7PfHPyNQHquwGHhzQKjJzHIwS1RWLrrIuT VTsScf1zLnPFXzu7tWjCSV1wXfBdtuQLAVv72wCG6LpzfC04FTrV6pTWSINIqewHpf5k ZD0g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV6BY7OXozvvwqSNBaJWx9uA2ZQWysvbyLiZt0KSeZhMzbSzz/5 pSo22XjeOFaZQ2AcQ2xZL3zUwknX2aPTh+miUgfFAiGOfvDYeA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxAyN7bVwlZcYW8G4r1tCnE/LRqGRWBS6f4BJjEpbZjH/DMX7t4kReQGWC5d9VDOgScP3KqYS4T2rfJ3jZbihY= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:738c:: with SMTP id l12mr10270435uap.135.1576340083518; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 08:14:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Haosong Huang Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:14:25 +0800 Message-ID: To: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] What's possible reasons that may cause rx_total_missed_packets increase in ixgbe driver? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi, DPDK masters, I am debugging a `imissed` issue when we are using DPDK. We notice that imissed increase even when the traffic is slow. We are using x520 nic and ixgbe driver. Via check the code, imissed comes from rx_total_missed_packets in ixgbe. But what's the possible reason that make rx_total_missed_packets increase in ixgbe? Highly appreciated your reply if you have any clues on this. On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 12:32 AM Haosong Huang wrote: > Hi, DPDK masters, I am debugging a `imissed` issue when we are using DPDK. > > We notice that imissed increase even when the traffic is slow. We are > using x520 nic and ixgbe driver. > > Via check the code, imissed comes from rx_total_missed_packets in ixgbe. > But what's the possible reason that make rx_total_missed_packets increase > in ixgbe? > > Highly appreciated your reply if you have any clues on this. > -- *Haosong Huang* STO *Mobile* +65 8299 3624 *Address* 5 Science Park Drive, Shopee Building, Singapore 118265