From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <NissimN@Radware.com> Received: from ILCAS1.corp.radware.com (mailout1.radware.com [192.115.180.130]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B54C3AE for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 11 May 2015 05:44:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ILMB1.corp.radware.com ([169.254.1.153]) by ILCAS1.corp.radware.com ([176.200.120.121]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Mon, 11 May 2015 06:43:59 +0300 From: Nissim Nisimov <NissimN@Radware.com> To: "Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com> Thread-Topic: Intel fortville not working with multi-segment Thread-Index: AQHQiNQ/xilfK9NqzkGx1SGsGrsiU511okEQgABoB4CAAB19fw== Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 03:43:59 +0000 Message-ID: 5899d592-8c87-47d9-92b6-d34260ce1aa4@radware.com> References: <94AA676E9B9A384A844E7692F3CAD906423BDF6F@ILMB1.corp.radware.com> <94AA676E9B9A384A844E7692F3CAD90642428A41@ILMB1.corp.radware.com> <94AA676E9B9A384A844E7692F3CAD90642432170@ILMB1.corp.radware.com>, <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E70A85A83D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E70A85A83D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "'dev@dpdk.org'" <dev@dpdk.org> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Intel fortville not working with multi-segment 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: Mon, 11 May 2015 03:44:01 -0000 Hi, I am using PF pass-through and it doesn't work even with 2000 bytes of serv= er response page size. Looks like the first segment of each session is not received. When i am changing the server response size to 1000 bytes, all works as exp= ected. I am working with dpdk 1.8 version. Any idea why ? Is it related to i40e multi segment support? Thx Nissim On May 11, 2015 5:03 AM, "Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Nissim > > Are you using PF pass-through or VF pass-through? > For PF pass-through, you might have already gotten the fix. > For VF pass-through, there is Hi Nissim Are you using PF pass-through or VF pass-through? For PF pass-through, you might have already gotten the fix. For VF pass-through, there is a bug fix which is needed for supporting jumb= o frame and multiple mbuf. http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/4641/ Regards, Helin > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Nissim Nisimov > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 3:48 AM > To: Nissim Nisimov; 'dev@dpdk.org' > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Intel fortville not working with multi-segment > > Hi, > > can someone assist regarding this issue? > > Is it a known limitation in i40e/dpdk (no support for multi-segment)? > > Thx > Nissim > > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Nissim Nisimov > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 5:44 PM > To: 'dev@dpdk.org' > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Intel fortville not working with multi-segment > > Hi, > > > > I am trying to work with Intel Fortville (XL710) NICs in Passthrough mode > from a VM running dpdk app. > > > First I didn't have any TX traffic from the VM, I got dpdk patch for this= issue > and it fixed it. (http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/4588/) > > But now I see that when trying to run multi-segment traffic not all the > packets reaching the VM (I tested it on bare metal as well and saw the > same issue) > > Is it a known issue? any workaround for it? > > Thanks, > Nissim