From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260DF45CFC for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 03:10:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B689C4027D; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 03:10:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qv1-f52.google.com (mail-qv1-f52.google.com [209.85.219.52]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50DA40268 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 03:10:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qv1-f52.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6d352707ea7so413996d6.2 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 18:10:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1731550232; x=1732155032; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FZEV1XPnZ/T8cmR2Bor9jihMM2sRQ1Y+sAiZQYUEs70=; b=RuUHNeRFJg1WH9zt+V2liSVaiYXrpZw60XUhtIj+SHSZp7acXAJTPs+wgatOCFJyh0 FZXY+UIt4Gdefxu2Oco//h2s9eLVG7I9VF+4/G5A/fBdzYdObkSIF/m41RZbJRJCCDTu /Gxs3CZiAkRe2OHZWqqH6ydyHAGRY0q/+A/3eotUxA4pDV9Ke6k97fl4o9svbDtR8ltY ZiglsN9KhhIrUAODnmPPZU6H6bKa32F8iPE/qejHm2D+0A+bYZPC5SV30OMjzieQ7nzm Dwp4yO65kFHbj7SV8zw/T+fr9PY9xR/8eCVeOyNhyRXgb396eJNKiE2Ic8WpruGZJ4Di X5uw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1731550232; x=1732155032; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=FZEV1XPnZ/T8cmR2Bor9jihMM2sRQ1Y+sAiZQYUEs70=; b=c/K+DpiXRjlKwkFULl2G5fd5e+UqWhsrU4+dLaddO2sTT3+RpXpP701h11muyfYvYQ b0V9Cb3kDvA9JdLscupVQd3xc1OT+pxbjvIY4JrPyJXOIB6Y5pGGuq9HAgv7EX3rk1/c 3qDoGz1931LtfJnJZoFihv+O9pwGDjVL9YUzHijmbjbzzxsWMW40UCeQRhTUSNIUt3eQ vgelp0ZgyU5waoaXuoJNQ3obqSIQHfntzVJylveUviAYe5TbgyNM5MnIOuSqNyJL848p pVSEIhxmI3uGqLwK6/7COxl/QHEGxe+6B1QpLUbDHkWHHy72UCIPxLy2n7hf/01zhpCk QhoQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWi8Ckw/MO87h7LqJMLW7Owj6L7pH6Lx0FVdGOZUW9E8m9jO5KaIYJbIaZRlj6UoYK+BP7Odw==@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwwuhizxDMfL0bSzTT9NspFY2rmx9WRubQnGBgle0434alfOpTo f4Al0/bXUZUbV1L7LGtRE6GO5s8P+EvWvs6npgFulll9uDfSxH5QmxpeOLQWo0oCP+qMd3p23z5 3acQp2A+P9A5qsFnodMO5cRiDxvc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEc6qFj2F/hmfoviok2U4i2v58qP4K6WinXL5Hu39HDEQmjilJeAvdFf0kiJXpU1nCjPWDoyYRnppH2ue4W5rE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5986:b0:6cb:be89:dd8 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6d39e14fec6mr341323876d6.22.1731550231899; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 18:10:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9487809.CDJkKcVGEf@thomas> In-Reply-To: From: Yasuhiro Ohara Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:10:20 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: DPDK with Mellanox ConnectX-5, complaining about mlx5_eth? To: CJ Sculti Cc: Thomas Monjalon , users@dpdk.org, Dariusz Sosnowski Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007bb6560626d5f492" X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org --0000000000007bb6560626d5f492 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I would suggest re-installation of MELLANOX OFED, and/or upgrading NIC firmware (can be done using OFED tools). Yes, warning on only 1 port is odd. I suspect some kind of mismatch, like older version of the NIC had only 1 port versions and the soft assumed it, for example. 2024=E5=B9=B411=E6=9C=8814=E6=97=A5(=E6=9C=A8) 5:43 CJ Sculti : > I'm not using vfio, I just bound interfaces on there one time to test. > Shouldn't I be able to just use the default mlx5_core driver, without > binding to uio_pci_generic? > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 4:26=E2=80=AFPM Thomas Monjalon > wrote: > >> 13/11/2024 21:10, CJ Sculti: >> > I've been running my application for years on igb_uio with Intel NICs.= I >> > recently replaced them with a Mellanox ConnectX-5 2x 40gbps NIC, updat= ed >> > the DPDK version my application uses, and compiled with support for ml= x5 >> > PMDs. Both 40Gbps ports are up with link, and both are in Ethernet mod= e, >> > not Infiniband mode. However, I'm getting complaints when I start my >> > application about trying to load 'mlx5_eth'? Both are bound to mlx5_co= re >> > driver at the moment. When I bind them to vfio-pci, or uio_pci_generic= , >> my >> > application fails to recognize them at all as valid DPDK devices. Anyo= ne >> > have any ideas? Also, strange that it only complains about one? I have >> them >> > configured in a bond on the kernel, as my application requires that. >> >> You must not bind mlx5 devices with VFIO. >> I recommend reading documentation. >> You can start here: >> https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/linux_gsg/linux_drivers.html#bifurcated-driv= er >> then >> https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/platform/mlx5.html#design >> >> >> >> --0000000000007bb6560626d5f492 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I would suggest re-installation of MELLANOX OFED, and/or = upgrading NIC firmware (can be done using OFED tools).

Yes, warning on only 1 port is odd. I suspec= t some kind of mismatch, like older version of the NIC had only 1 port vers= ions and the soft assumed it, for example.


= 2024=E5=B9=B411=E6=9C=8814=E6=97=A5(=E6=9C=A8) 5:43 CJ Sculti <cj@cj.gy>:
I'm not using vfio, I just bound interfaces= =C2=A0on there=C2=A0one time to test. Shouldn't I be able to just use t= he default mlx5_core driver, without binding to uio_pci_generic?


On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 4:26=E2=80=AFPM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<= /a>> wrote:
13/11/2024 21:10, CJ Sculti:
> I've been running my application for years on igb_uio with Intel N= ICs. I
> recently replaced them with a Mellanox ConnectX-5 2x 40gbps NIC, updat= ed
> the DPDK version my application uses, and compiled with support for ml= x5
> PMDs. Both 40Gbps ports are up with link, and both are in Ethernet mod= e,
> not Infiniband mode. However, I'm getting complaints when I start = my
> application about trying to load 'mlx5_eth'? Both are bound to= mlx5_core
> driver at the moment. When I bind them to vfio-pci, or uio_pci_generic= , my
> application fails to recognize them at all as valid DPDK devices. Anyo= ne
> have any ideas? Also, strange that it only complains about one? I have= them
> configured in a bond on the kernel, as my application requires that.
You must not bind mlx5 devices with VFIO.
I recommend reading documentation.
You can start here:
https://doc.dpdk.org/guide= s/linux_gsg/linux_drivers.html#bifurcated-driver
then
https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/platform/mlx5.html#= design



--0000000000007bb6560626d5f492--