From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF13B2716 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 08:28:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Dec 2015 23:28:08 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,436,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="874663456" Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.66.49]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Dec 2015 23:28:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 15:28:18 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu To: Pavel Fedin Message-ID: <20151216072818.GO29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <20151215082324.GG29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <007f01d13715$042a0a80$0c7e1f80$@samsung.com> <20151215100548.GD32243@pxdev.xzpeter.org> <00b601d13733$97e063a0$c7a12ae0$@samsung.com> <20151215133612.GJ29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <00ca01d1373f$3dd4ab30$b97e0190$@samsung.com> <20151215135907.GK29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <00f101d13749$0eb97330$2c2c5990$@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00f101d13749$0eb97330$2c2c5990$@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: dev@dpdk.org, 'Victor Kaplansky' Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4 for 2.3] vhost-user live migration support 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: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 07:28:10 -0000 On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 05:58:28PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > > > No idea. Maybe you have changed some other configures (such as of ovs) > > without notice? Or, the ovs bridge interface resets? > > I don't touch the ovs at all. Just shut down the guest, rebuild the qemu, reinstall it, run the guest. > > > > > BTW, would you please try my v1 patch set with above diff applied to > > see if the ping loss is still there. You might also want to run tcpdump > > with the dest host ovs bridge, to see if GARP is actually sent. > > Retested with wireshark running on the host. I used my qemu patch instead, but it should not matter at all: > --- cut --- > diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c > index 1b6c5ac..5ca2987 100644 > --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c > +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c > @@ -480,7 +480,12 @@ static int vhost_user_get_u64(struct vhost_dev *dev, int request, uint64_t *u64) > > static int vhost_user_get_features(struct vhost_dev *dev, uint64_t *features) > { > - return vhost_user_get_u64(dev, VHOST_USER_GET_FEATURES, features); > + int ret = vhost_user_get_u64(dev, VHOST_USER_GET_FEATURES, features); > + > + if (!ret) { > + virtio_add_feature(features, VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_ANNOUNCE); > + } > + return ret; > } > > static int vhost_user_set_owner(struct vhost_dev *dev) > --- cut --- > > So, here are both wireshark captures on the host side: Pavel, I can reproduce your issue on my side with above patch (and only when F_GUEST_ANNOUNCE is not set at DPDK vhost lib). TBH, I don't know why that happened, the cause could be subtle, and I don't think it's worthwhile to dig it, especially it's not the right way to do it. So, would you please try to set the F_GUEST_ANNOUNCE flag on DPDK vhost lib side, as my early diff showed and have another test? On the other hand, I failed to find two identical server, the two closet I found are E5-2695 and E5-2699, However, the MSI lost fatal bug still occurred. I'm out of thoughts what could be the root cause. I'm asking help from som KVM gurus; hopefully they could shine some lights on. Meanwhile, I may need try to debug it. Since you don't meet such issue, I'd hope you could have a test and tell me how it works :) Thanks. --yliu