From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <users-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2391A0547 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:25:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72D5E40143; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:25:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f45.google.com (mail-io1-f45.google.com [209.85.166.45]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5AD40040 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:25:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f45.google.com with SMTP id n10so3623471ion.8 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 May 2021 03:25:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/KC5tfbih596dpi03artWddszz6JmRHdZZWq1kTo4sI=; b=s2uWNIFLkSUgrBsqq9WMbVFYCMkduJeR+MUfuVBS2uwSGCt8Hy6iiwcrnuyPyBeEhT 5Xhag06Dt4tlhX3IkcDqBkNtUjSlyBLYeVeoYJ9qRY5LUs9uOy8lWa/qLUQeoZemRKrm ZvOvN/bLDPwTpgzQhl4Yw79LuvG61S/kB29ddI+a1Pqbvf7aneZwnmGhxnNavDx/UhtB QYmuoUrQ6sYD41mp9gi71Hl9KGr0Kged/a6oPIZ49jjmbs1fZz8iZIRUtvFzfuFQ9dbJ OxDn7b2qaZ5YA12jrvfTAJswEvGgOErJh3FT49rRnuKb9j0I0tFEGgFpghypJug6TRiM A4UQ== 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:cc; bh=/KC5tfbih596dpi03artWddszz6JmRHdZZWq1kTo4sI=; b=fUHC3MfXqRfRQMxyGBGG5juWXO4qxBV17QIu/15teW0dKElpi17CqocWlMhSWWU8mN BkbTb7x/qBUk4CsFSK/eoRCsmhkm+cUiFHV8VIrJxMcz1wrs5jVlKvFbg2gRomvgDJzA q0+F6hBhKBrn0Qm+qJ+wJhXofgZcOF4+OsO+Btb+c2krfiDVKASjE0s2DcT5B8AnIdhX xPNEN1hDTgc9xHeqDQeVrwLQrrDuza9I1ddCNyG4IxvHmwCrgBaSVJ7DDcBrgbhIHxyt l7o5S3bBKsM6upwA7OGg5Ka2BT7jmk8dRciVb5rYZJMndh8qTzF/VbWrB5kV7YTYXoxX KHQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Yaaq40LM1HVOkfQozEjodHJAg6LeF7bFEH6kQQ4wiJ5/xDCJ5 f6/IOfP6L+C3bTALi/7S6Pb7neTFLLANZroBjbA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz2PsMcXkbWcZ6MQuw0DDqXQ2it/tsYwK2nQX8IypimuHp84LLFG0L+uLpiSdBses84CWVVzDTtwSX25QOuHLA= X-Received: by 2002:a02:a312:: with SMTP id q18mr7952372jai.24.1622197509722; Fri, 28 May 2021 03:25:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <CAAUNki1XiOv3VMQZZpF0TOGWMYf+PpGZgpVg8iXom3nXqTkYqw@mail.gmail.com> <DM4PR12MB5054ADA6406B1C90F6ACE5C5CF239@DM4PR12MB5054.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> <20210527125703.059eeead@hermes.local> <CAN7yQ2oCwsjU0addKX9Uev5upm7Xd9+_QuWyguQowrm_ahRnzw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAN7yQ2oCwsjU0addKX9Uev5upm7Xd9+_QuWyguQowrm_ahRnzw@mail.gmail.com> From: madhukar mythri <madhukar.mythri@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 15:54:58 +0530 Message-ID: <CAAUNki0MB=fa3YAWK-Bggz+ezZC_7OMHb8+SOL4BiG19VyT7UA@mail.gmail.com> To: Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen <zain2294@gmail.com> Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>, users <users@dpdk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Issue with UDP based fragmented packets on Azure cloud X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/users>, <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/users/> List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/users>, <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" <users-bounces@dpdk.org> Hi Raslan and stephen, Thanks for your response. Yes, i had done RSS for IP layer only as follows: portConf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf.rss_hf =3D (ETH_RSS_IP ); // | ETH_RSS_TC= P| ETH_RSS_UDP); Commented out the RSS for UDP/TCP flags. But, still im facing the same issue, the fragments pkts are not coming on to the single queue, not sure why ? Here we use DPDK is 20.11. The interfaces are coming up with Failsafe PMD with 2 queues. I had seen issue related to Azure UDP fragmentation on the following link: https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/azure-docs/issues/29476 So, any known limitations. Regards, Madhuker. On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:22 PM Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen < zain2294@gmail.com> wrote: > I wonder is there any way to bypass RSS for some IP flag values like mf, > or frag_offset > > On Fri, May 28, 2021, 12:57 AM Stephen Hemminger < > stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 27 May 2021 15:40:57 +0000 >> Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: users <users-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of madhukar mythri >> > > Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2021 5:58 PM >> > > To: users@dpdk.org >> > > Subject: [dpdk-users] Issue with UDP based fragmented packets on Azu= re >> > > cloud >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > We are facing issue with UDP/IP based fragmented packets on Azure >> cloud >> > > platform with Accelerated-Network enabled ports. >> > > >> > > UDP fragmented Rx packets were able to receive well on media ports. >> But, >> > > when two fragmented packet received, first fragment is received on >> Queue- >> > > 0 >> > > and second fragment is received on Queue-1. Ideally all the >> fragments(of >> > > single large packet) should be received single queue based on RSS, s= o >> that >> > > we can re-assemble as single pkt and process it, which is working >> well in >> > > other platforms on KVM hyper-visors(with I40evf NIC=E2=80=99s). >> > > >> > > I think, the as per RSS hash cacluation all the fragmented pkts shou= ld >> > > reach on single-queue(because the 5-tuple hash value will be same), >> but >> > > this is not happening in-case of Azue VM's Why ? >> > > >> > > Does anybody faced similar issue, please let me know your >> suggestion. >> > I guess it depends on the fragments themselves, >> > If your first fragment contains a UDP header (the first frag in the >> list) then the RSS hash will be on the full 5 tuble >> > Src/dst IP and src/dst udp >> > But, for the other frags you'll not get src/dst udp since they are not >> present in the pkt. >> > I guess you should be using only RSS On IP header to make all frags go >> to the same queue. >> > > >> >> Yes, and this is not unique to Azure or even the DPDK. >> Fragmented packets do not have enough information (no UDP header in >> second fragment) >> to do L4 RSS. >> >>