From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6915569A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  6 Jan 2015 10:41:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2015 01:38:09 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,706,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="657437154"
Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.243.20.27])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 06 Jan 2015 01:41:22 -0800
Received: by  (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 06 Jan 2015 09:41:21 +0025
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 09:41:21 +0000
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20150106094120.GA1488@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <CAM8Q2aVXRMbJZ3u25u_P1hwy_acGGvBQEQr8-CLmWwNK-HPfNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150101040032.GA11645@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <CAM8Q2aXd0++=JCrMO7pq9Ai+TufXHcZs4H0O00L0N12fHpcdBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1613023.VipzgMKAkl@xps13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1613023.VipzgMKAkl@xps13>
Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] l3fwd error, port 0 is not present on the board
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 09:41:26 -0000

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 10:02:25AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-01-02 09:07, Lyn M:
> > In my original post, I thought my choice of hex portmask -p 0x3 was causing
> > this issue -- now I know that was not the case.  But, I am still curious
> > about how the hex portmask is determined.  Since I only have two ports
> > bound to igb_uio, my hex postmask will always be 0x3?  What if I choose to
> > bind other ports to igb_uio?  Is there a Linux command I can run to
> > determine what mask to use with the -p option?
> 
> That's something which could be done.
> Port numbering is defined by probing order. Does a tool showing the (dry-run)
> probed devices, their number and mask, would help you?
> By the way, you are welcome to try developing it.
> 
> -- 
> Thomas

The port numbering should generally be in the same order as the ports are listed
in dpdk_nic_bind script, so perhaps we could just add a documentation note to 
that effect.

/Bruce