From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5133E1F3 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:44:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uucp by smtp.tuxdriver.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1X6kJI-0003yH-Po; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:45:08 -0400 Received: from linville-x1.hq.tuxdriver.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by linville-x1.hq.tuxdriver.com (8.14.8/8.14.6) with ESMTP id s6EHZVad009176; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:35:31 -0400 Received: (from linville@localhost) by linville-x1.hq.tuxdriver.com (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s6EHZVbL009175; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:35:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:35:30 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Bruce Richardson Message-ID: <20140714173529.GF27848@tuxdriver.com> References: <1405024369-30058-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <20140711225108.GA9381@sivswdev02.ir.intel.com> <20140714134832.GD27848@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140714134832.GD27848@tuxdriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for AF_PACKET-based virtual devices 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: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:44:27 -0000 On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 09:48:33AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:51:08PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:32:49PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > This is a Linux-specific virtual PMD driver backed by an AF_PACKET > > I'm just trying this out now on a Fedora 20 machine, using kernel > > 3.14.9-200.fc20.x86_64. However, while the first packet PMD port > > initializes correctly, the subsequent ones do not. Please see output > > from my test run below. All four ports are of the same type. > > Thanks I'll check into it. I'm not sure why you would only be able > to set the fanout on the first port... It looks like I lost a patch in the prep for posting. As a result, I was using the same fanout group ID between different interfaces... :-( I'll post a V2 in a bit...thanks! John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.