From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f179.google.com (mail-pf0-f179.google.com [209.85.192.179]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF8D156A9 for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 00:39:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf0-f179.google.com with SMTP id x72so45204081pfd.2 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xB0Gk3JpKNeFJWljTSvDcaBbwHx0PSeF15vkTSBvQTg=; b=OdNx/844M65vdR9SBG9MbQDX72f7GUGkF1hj7zhIwcbwKMCDAbQ+vuWEWzYDGDOzVj VucvY8ruZ0qfGwihJ1AiWfD+JnMoxUMnqHgCiNztpzSulRTIYGpE4dvNlyg+iigKnBfj Gn1+TL5hLh6zuoVYb7KByXKzTws8+U9X9EecvvViNTGCnYboJLyfotrhn9U5P9J/vkE0 +5D906ayIX358veJUeqkh7qfYc/t0Q2x04gPZAK1ULXcvh0paJqQA9H4H+8jGfyccpRu 8AFdQMtHVzpDV7jGs/jQN4MoRe3cgHtAU7hl4CqXaEnipkDtaEpSQVteEJZsRmWG62WE /MFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xB0Gk3JpKNeFJWljTSvDcaBbwHx0PSeF15vkTSBvQTg=; b=B+dsPBT4rR+Ub2f6xSvWnOlb6kKh2xo9vHInZUD+7HT6BKTL+2RC2yS8hcO/Y/DzY1 csJBYN1tSwccAVSaAks1wUy31gHST5DGfEY+e7aEviFrHQ1z/gnQ2CGX9JJaR9BVIh9o Bc4JPCFhCsUch+5J/otA0INVX2r4OWyWv3PYmd9H2X0JNWm0IHIJGpLtsAXpNYCe0NPA XGQQGtELq1H2Sv9m0utMyobDvpaisLkEEx9FTK0O0cS6rBRsuBqhgpiNKHfYe140msL2 mc7byNG4ZocuQS7f8CvqJPM3frJnDmDjQtDckeXskpXOCMwWblB/b4qIpgUtEC/E8hyQ 0/xA== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouuNcumiLKNZ1vAPJHIPB0aIxfW49XYcZZ2FlagsRPnRDkoSieqi+3kWNd8fETOzHA== X-Received: by 10.98.65.139 with SMTP id g11mr10437768pfd.140.1469227156968; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:39:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (static-50-53-69-251.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.69.251]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cf1sm22327145pac.20.2016.07.22.15.39.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:39:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:39:32 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Prabahar Radhakrishnan Cc: users@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20160722153932.15d08ef9@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] em1000 driver lockup in KVM 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: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 22:39:18 -0000 On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:19:29 -0700 Prabahar Radhakrishnan wrote: > Hi, > I was running a dpdk application with e1000 driver and I am facing a > rare driver lockup condition. Under this condition, what I am seeing is > that the Receive side locks up. The transmit side is fine. When I execute > "rte_eth_dev_stop()/rte_eth_dev_start()" from within the VM, the dpdk > application recovers. The lockup happens once in 2 or 3 days if I > continuously ping an IP address serviced by the dpdk application. Once it > locks up, what I am noticing is that even though packets are coming in, the > driver is not populating them and signaling the event. In other words, in > "eth_em_recv_pkts" call, I am not seeing "E1000_RXD_STAT_DD" being set for > status, and the driver bails out. If anyone has come across such > condition, please let me know? Appreciate the help. > > Environment: I have a VM running on top of Ubuntu/KVM. > Application: Running dpdk-2.0.0. > VM: uses e1000 driver. > On the KVM side, our port is sitting in a bridge. There are other VNFs > that we use for testing and some of them are using virtio driver. > > Thank You > regards Prab Save yourself lots of pain, use virtio not e1000 with DPDK. The emulation of E1000 in QEMU is very limited and DPDK expects real hardware. Lots of features and control are missing.