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