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 127E545E4B for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 23:49:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900174025E; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 23:49:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from ns.mahan.org (unknown [23.24.207.145]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5A6400D6 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 23:49:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.53] (crowTrobot [23.24.207.146]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ns.mahan.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0146C1D46C for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 14:49:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 14:49:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: users@dpdk.org From: Patrick Mahan Subject: Expectations of an RX mbuf when using virtio PMD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Hello All, Specifics: DPDK Version: dpdk-stable-18.11.11 Linux Kernel: 4.19.87 Intel 64-bit architecture I am working on a code to support our socket based processes that need to run on our DPDK-enabled platform. I am using the virtio_user exception path mechanism to support this and initial tests seem fine. However, I am seeing issues when we receive the packet from the virtio port, that the packet_type field is not set. In my code, I have setup my physical PMD (i40e) as etherdev 0 and etherdev 1 and have setup the virtual side with virtio as etherdev 2 and etherdev 3. I am pairing this as etherdev 0 (physical) to etherdev 2 (virtio_user0) and etherdev 1 (physical) to etherdev 3 (virtio_user1). I am using the EAL function `rte_eal_hotplug_add()` as suggested in the documentation. I have added code in my dispatch function to generate a syslog(3) to print the contents of the packet_type field in the received mbuf. I then generate traffic to etherdev 1 from connected host and I am seeing the following: The inbound packet log shows - Dec 7 21:24:45 2024 pmahan-dpdk pktdaemon-eal[27614]: CPU 2 TID 1140607382984128: [pktdaemon.NOTICE]: pkt_dpdk::switch_q_pkts()[2][1=>3][Q=0]: mbuf packet type is 0x00000091 So etherdev 1 packet (physical) has packet_type of 0x91 which translates to RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN Which has been my experience for receiving packets from the physical PMD. However, now that I have added the virtio port, the return packet does not seemed to have this value set - Dec 7 21:24:45 2024 pmahan-dpdk pktdaemon-eal[27614]: CPU 2 TID 1140607382984128: [pktdaemon.NOTICE]: pkt_dpdk::switch_q_pkts()[2][3=>1][Q=0]: mbuf packet type is 0x00000000 I have looked into virtio PMD code and see that there is a function to fill in the packet type called `virtio_rx_offload()` but it is only called if the hardware associated with the virtual queue supports offloading and then only if the `virtio_net_hdr` has no flags or its `gso_type` is not GSO_NONE. If I ignore the flags and just inject the packets directly, everything seems to work, but I have internal code that needs to know the basic ethernet type as well as the L3 options and I was hoping to rely on the packet_type of the mbuf instead of having to do packet groveling. Is this an "as designed" or am I missing something in the configuration? Thanks for any pointers, Patrick