From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1134-203.mail.aliyun.com (out1134-203.mail.aliyun.com [42.120.134.203]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E564F5A15 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 01:44:21 +0100 (CET) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=CONTINUE; BC=0.06345109|-1; FP=0|0|0|0|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=r41g03006; MF=liang.xu@cinfotech.cn; PH=DW; RN=2; RT=2; SR=0; Received: from WS-web (liang.xu@cinfotech.cn[203.110.175.218]) by r46d02001.xy2.aliyun.com at Thu, 22 Jan 2015 08:44:16 +0800 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 08:44:16 +0800 From: "XU Liang" To: "Bruce Richardson" Message-ID: <4fdd13ec-bc94-45d1-b467-6110bf062bbd@cinfotech.cn> X-Mailer: Alimail-Mailagent revision 2680000 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: , 20150119105754.GA12244@bricha3-MOBL3 In-Reply-To: 20150119105754.GA12244@bricha3-MOBL3 x-aliyun-mail-creator: W4_2681352_tIVTW96aWxsYS81LjAgKFgxMTsgTGludXggeDg2XzY0KSBBcHBsZVdlYktpdC81MzcuMzYgKEtIVE1MLCBsaWtlIEdlY2tvKSBDaHJvbWUvMzkuMC4yMTcxLjk5IFNhZmFyaS81MzcuMzY=gK Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: dev Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] =?utf-8?q?Should_the_other_queues_at_same_port_work_wh?= =?utf-8?q?en_one_queue_is_full_=3F?= X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: XU Liang List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:44:22 -0000 Thanks, I had validated the 'rx_drop_en' setting. It's worked. =0ARegards,/Lia= ng------------------------------------------------------------------From:Bruce= Richardson Time:2015 Jan 19 (Mon) 18:58To:=E5=BE=90= =E4=BA=AE Cc:dev Subject:Re: [dpdk-dev] S= hould the other queues at same port work when one queue is full ?=0AOn Sun, Ja= n 18, 2015 at 07:12:31PM +0800, XU Liang wrote:=0A> I configured the 82599 por= ts to work in multi-queue mode and flow director to assign different TCP conne= ctions to different queues. A multi-process application receive packets from q= ueues and each=C2=A0process reads a queue. When I kill one process, the proces= s's=C2=A0queue is full, all=C2=A0descriptors of the queue is used. Then I send= packets to other queues, but no=C2=A0packet is received by other processes fr= om other queues. And no ierrors at the port stats.=C2=A0=C2=A0I'm not sure it'= s a bug or designed that way.=C2=A0=0A> I expect that when a process exits abn= ormally affect only part of the connections, but now all the connections are n= ot working properly.=C2=A0How can I just turn off the exception queue, so that= other processes / queues work properly.=0A=0AYou need to turn on the "drop en= able" bit in your NIC configuration to allow =0Apackets for full queues to be = dropped, allowing other queues to continue as normal.=0AIn DPDK this is set by= the value "rx_drop_en" in the rx configuration.=0A=0AIn the latest DPDK tree,= you can see this value being set for the symmetric mp=0Aexample application i= n: examples/multi_process/symmetric_mp/main.c=0A=0ARegards,=0A/Bruce >From stephen@networkplumber.org Thu Jan 22 01:49:34 2015 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com (mail-pa0-f44.google.com [209.85.220.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE9D5A15 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 01:49:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id et14so56381537pad.3 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:49:33 -0800 (PST) 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-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=H8JW7fWzbM0DBli4X1upg8zgZsDDbA8KcNBeYDLxuuU=; b=eeP6qV5E/cjWU2MO8cjzjAdbTsJwWWFy3mP05loNgvofg6IZ94ZxsoHv4wNkhmRmT/ kBHWlfPHim8umvM+KzYXVq3xyd/CTaEDpx/1qpEbrdDrwN2Tq44REtJQIjnHp6BTB5rQ QuYYK9AuVT4JBivrD0PUgdpNna4+BCivtXcqHiNE7ER90w5UZaz48uHzgpvPTYMNIjnQ GlrT8O0em8LzaGcUE/YjuyyH4FeH/9vu1lCFZ+uY8UpAwtUUqtBHz3hF2TbKoOlIxjD1 NpE0aOYnd/PeeZOgGNByq3kRRGT0499HWVOoEquLmek/Kuu0YzVnB1MQ4L+a+u7qSSqS DhIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQltC01bkE1jUvCqzoE++kjA/XcMG8TlETacR66Eoq5divXlSieGcwNwj8T6aoD9vJdFAVbf X-Received: by 10.68.201.1 with SMTP id jw1mr43913068pbc.167.1421887773866; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from urahara (static-50-53-82-155.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.82.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ji5sm7099258pbd.22.2015.01.21.16.49.31 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:49:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:49:25 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20150121164925.10d1751c@urahara> In-Reply-To: <5685862.aqyVHy67Ev@xps13> References: <1418793196-17953-1-git-send-email-stephen@networkplumber.org> <5685862.aqyVHy67Ev@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] vmxnet3: driver enhancements 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: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:49:34 -0000 On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 12:02:11 +0100 Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Someone to review these patches? Any comments from Bruce Richardson