DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning
@ 2024-10-28 14:45 Viacheslav Ovsiienko
  2024-10-28 15:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
  2024-11-18  7:08 ` Raslan Darawsheh
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko @ 2024-10-28 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev; +Cc: rasland, matan, suanmingm

There is the mlx5 NIC limitations - configuring MTU
for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning. The actual maximal
packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU configured
on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath
running over VF should be prepared to handle packets
of this maximal size.

Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
---
 doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
index 8d1a1311d4..c7dcb74da7 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
@@ -191,6 +191,13 @@ Limitations
     - IPv4/TCP with CVLAN filtering
     - L4 steering rules for port RSS of UDP, TCP and IP
 
+- PCI Virtual Function MTU:
+
+  Configuring MTU for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning.
+  The actual maximal packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU configured
+  on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath running over VF should be
+  prepared to handle packets of this maximal size.
+
 - For secondary process:
 
   - Forked secondary process not supported.
-- 
2.34.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning
  2024-10-28 14:45 [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning Viacheslav Ovsiienko
@ 2024-10-28 15:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
  2024-10-28 17:05   ` Slava Ovsiienko
  2024-11-18  7:08 ` Raslan Darawsheh
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2024-10-28 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Viacheslav Ovsiienko; +Cc: dev, rasland, matan, suanmingm

On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 16:45:09 +0200
Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> wrote:

> There is the mlx5 NIC limitations - configuring MTU
> for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning. The actual maximal
> packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU configured
> on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath
> running over VF should be prepared to handle packets
> of this maximal size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
> index 8d1a1311d4..c7dcb74da7 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
> @@ -191,6 +191,13 @@ Limitations
>      - IPv4/TCP with CVLAN filtering
>      - L4 steering rules for port RSS of UDP, TCP and IP
>  
> +- PCI Virtual Function MTU:
> +
> +  Configuring MTU for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning.
> +  The actual maximal packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU configured
> +  on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath running over VF should be
> +  prepared to handle packets of this maximal size.
> +

This is true of many drivers not just MLX5.

And it is generally true that Maximum Receive Unit (MRU) can
be larger than Maximum Transmit Unit (MTU).

I would rather see a more precise definition of MTU in DPDK show up
in ethdev documentation than sprinkling bits in each vendor driver.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* RE: [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning
  2024-10-28 15:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2024-10-28 17:05   ` Slava Ovsiienko
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Slava Ovsiienko @ 2024-10-28 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: dev, Raslan Darawsheh, Matan Azrad, Suanming Mou

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 5:52 PM
> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Suanming Mou <suanmingm@nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning
> 
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 16:45:09 +0200
> Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> wrote:
> 
> > There is the mlx5 NIC limitations - configuring MTU for PCI Virtual
> > Function has no meaning. The actual maximal packet size in VF's
> > receiving is limited by MTU configured on the related PCI Physical
> > Function, the DPDK datapath running over VF should be prepared to
> > handle packets of this maximal size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> >  doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst | 7 +++++++
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst index
> > 8d1a1311d4..c7dcb74da7 100644
> > --- a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
> > @@ -191,6 +191,13 @@ Limitations
> >      - IPv4/TCP with CVLAN filtering
> >      - L4 steering rules for port RSS of UDP, TCP and IP
> >
> > +- PCI Virtual Function MTU:
> > +
> > +  Configuring MTU for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning.
> > +  The actual maximal packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU
> > + configured  on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath
> > + running over VF should be  prepared to handle packets of this maximal
> size.
> > +
> 
> This is true of many drivers not just MLX5.
> 
> And it is generally true that Maximum Receive Unit (MRU) can be larger than
> Maximum Transmit Unit (MTU).
> 
> I would rather see a more precise definition of MTU in DPDK show up in
> ethdev documentation than sprinkling bits in each vendor driver.

There is the specifics for mlx5 - it operates in "bifurcated mode",
mlx5 PMD inherits/configures the MTU system settings, not the hardware ones  directly.
So, MTU naming looks like to be correct.

And, from time to time, we see user risen questions about VF MTU,
especially in virtualized environment. MTU is configured (either with system utilities
or with DPDK) and has no effect, embarrassing the users.

I have no objections to update the generic rte_ethdev chapter,
but it would require attention from other vendors as well.

With best regards,
Slava



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning
  2024-10-28 14:45 [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning Viacheslav Ovsiienko
  2024-10-28 15:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2024-11-18  7:08 ` Raslan Darawsheh
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Raslan Darawsheh @ 2024-11-18  7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Slava Ovsiienko, dev; +Cc: Matan Azrad, Suanming Mou

Hi,

From: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 4:45 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: Raslan Darawsheh; Matan Azrad; Suanming Mou
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning

There is the mlx5 NIC limitations - configuring MTU
for PCI Virtual Function has no meaning. The actual maximal
packet size in VF's receiving is limited by MTU configured
on the related PCI Physical Function, the DPDK datapath
running over VF should be prepared to handle packets
of this maximal size.

Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>

Patch applied to next-net-mlx,

Kindest regards,
Raslan Darawsheh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-11-18  7:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-10-28 14:45 [PATCH 1/1] doc: virtual function MTU settings has no meaning Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2024-10-28 15:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-28 17:05   ` Slava Ovsiienko
2024-11-18  7:08 ` Raslan Darawsheh

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).