From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D054A594B for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 10:15:42 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-la0-f50.google.com with SMTP id el20so8009831lab.9 for ; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:16:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=aVde236Pfv4fLvUCQAimtd2bq0M98vCwoHhreb5VoXI=; b=h2+IPP9uM8hfTIxJi//Lj/83sET6vs4HLecV02sOuZu7WPbqhfaca6UYDSuwfSgtFU +OrgAQIztM+jgPCoAY2i6BXT7aSV5hIoU7W+alHlnXmT3PCxjmDcOiM7rG0vMtLOejYz 6BmcSB5j5+Eic/c7BcE67Ahql7ke2fD2zSnz1PpO4OzBA+1o/th3vfkOyRwK07xHyunB bNbwGpMLV8nDmS/vd/XNt2B5Kufui4dGvcEgCoi773855b55P2yP+WieoWChFc7QQrhB dMiUjZaKToldtkeZbpWRhBIgj4v7uWLSU/oxj2Cldhl6ToZZLED3WvAe4vw/k+Cp5M9F Ki9Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.135.102 with SMTP id pr6mr19499530lbb.43.1388740613039; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:16:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.59.164 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 01:16:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201401021524.14069.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 17:16:52 +0800 Message-ID: From: Jose Gavine Cueto To: Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] intel x540-at2 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, 03 Jan 2014 09:15:43 -0000 Thanks again. So there is a possibility that vf will fail with DPDK due to not fully supported pf. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Cheers, Pepe On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Jose Gavine Cueto wrote: > Sorry I accidentally excluded the list. I've pasted the replies: > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > I see thanks. > > I'm actually running my DPDK application on a guest OS but I'm always > getting an invalid instruction error. I was thinking that this was due to > ixgbevf driver in guest that commands the host driver which is not-fully > supported by DPDK, and consequently ran an invalid instruction. This > brings me back to the questions: > > Are SR-IOV virtual function drivers supported by DPDK PMD (I guess yes) ? > If yes, does the physical function (host) driver affects the DPDK > application in any way especially if it isn't fully supported yet by DPDK? > > I've tried looking at incompatibility issues with respect to compiler and > processor archs. but it seems OK to me. > > Thanks, > Pepe > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SR-IOV is supported. There are dependencies with PF driver which handle NIC > configuration. VF/PF communication is done via mailbox. > > Please use the list. > > > Thomas > > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Thomas Monjalon < > thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote: > >> 23/12/2013 10:18, Jose Gavine Cueto : >> > I can't find a MACRO for this nic in rte_pci_dev_ids.h, does this mean >> this >> > isn't supported as of this moment ? >> >> Yes >> But probably that >> hw->mac.type = ixgbe_mac_X540 >> apply also to x540-at2. >> >> Please to try to add it and send the patch if it works. >> -- >> Thomas >> > > > > -- > To stop learning is like to stop loving. > -- To stop learning is like to stop loving.