Re: [dpdk-dev] Potential regression introduced by commit b10231aed1edb9

[Balazs Nemeth <bnemeth@redhat.com>]

Hi, I already posted a patch that fixes the issue on my side here: 
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-December/195206.html

Regards,
Balazs

On Wed, 2020-12-30 at 12:51 +0000, Devendra Singh Rawat wrote:
> Adding more people to comment/investigate here.
> 
> Devendra, could it be that we don't consider subsequent calls of
> promisc_enabled + allmulti_enable ?
> 
> Devendra >> yes, I agree that as long as promiscuous mode is enabled
> for a port, all traffic should be accepted even if allmulticast is
> enabled latter. Commit b10231aed1edb9 shouldn't have changed that.
> I will prepare a fix patch for this.
> 
> On 18/12/2020 2:34 pm, Balazs Nemeth wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > introduces a regression on my systems. I have a 
> > "QLogic Corp. FastLinQ QL41000 Series 10/25/40/50GbE Controller"
> > which 
> > relies on the qede driver. Calling
> > rte_eth_promiscuous_enable(portid)
> > followed by rte_eth_allmulticast_enable(port_id) causes no packets
> > to 
> > arrive from my generator. It's important to add that the generator 
> > doesn't specifically target the mac of the port. I presume that 
> > irrespective of dst mac, if a port is put into promiscuous mode,
> > all 
> > packets should arrive and rte_eth_allmulticast_enable should not
> > cause
> > *less* packets to arrive. Am I missing something? It seems that
> > b10231aed1edb9 inadvertently introduced either a bug or a pretty 
> > significant change in semantics (at least for qede)?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Balazs
> >