From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A11B62 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 22:55:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: by obbzf10 with SMTP id zf10so48016380obb.2 for ; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:55:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qA0hjb+xT7zBodQSQuame9zyb0ChkA8tbSULv+LmumE=; b=LHOUQEg1cBYXRZfv3XIi+gi9Fa85schluXRMZ3TvMzF4CXpt2ITC1xdQntnTwZ8V7e 29BPqObFl5GGXKKW3bIAPiVNvv/WQ+pC3s0X0Wx7aaFdAraayfvX2mB6F4EknjtukkaT 7oGz4mSl5lke/UOx7FI7olAppqAH7wwyWFvDWTB9/6GmJ/uROw4Vxy3aaKKGbEZewMIi EXPGA6HAIVzP63GOPA3Pw6PHTdXUeNfVrjUp3eOBTHbS7LonBLW/2kvKBNmm6v5aAnOf 6QZqdMAo42Ptt/t7ZO0Yt5bQ65TcAN5EwyLWbElvrUkH4jvOumz0zoSD0rj38MAt0ssq rYgg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.125.8 with SMTP id mm8mr6229794oeb.73.1444337711552; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.50.137 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 13:55:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 13:55:11 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Bill O'Hara" To: Olga Shern Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Mellanox PMD failure w/DPDK-2.1.0 and MLNX_OFED-3.1-1.0.3 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, 08 Oct 2015 20:55:12 -0000 Olga If it's all all helpful, linking our code against dpdk-2.0 and (statically) against the appropriate custom-built libibverbs that we used with it, works on those machines. There is of course no call to ibv_exp_create_res_domain(= ) in that version of the library. But it at least confirms basic operation of the upgraded OFED and firmware on those boxes. Is there anything else we can check or confirm for you? thanks bill On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Bill O'Hara wrote: > Hi Olga > > Firmware is version 2.35.5100. Configuration details below. > > Thanks for any hints. > bill > > root:~# cat /etc/modprobe.d/mlx4_core.conf > options mlx4_core port_type_array=3D2,2 num_vfs=3D16 probe_vf=3D4 > > root:~# ibstat > CA 'mlx4_0' > CA type: MT4099 > Number of ports: 1 > Firmware version: 2.35.5100 > Hardware version: 1 > Node GUID: 0xf4521403008f1680 > System image GUID: 0xf4521403008f1683 > Port 1: > State: Active > Physical state: LinkUp > Rate: 56 > Base lid: 0 > LMC: 0 > SM lid: 0 > Capability mask: 0x0c010000 > Port GUID: 0xf65214fffe8f1680 > Link layer: Ethernet > CA 'mlx4_1' > CA type: MT4100 > Number of ports: 1 > Firmware version: 2.35.5100 > Hardware version: 1 > Node GUID: 0x00140500c2d3b05f > System image GUID: 0xf4521403008f1683 > Port 1: > State: Active > Physical state: LinkUp > Rate: 56 > Base lid: 0 > LMC: 0 > SM lid: 0 > Capability mask: 0x0c010000 > Port GUID: 0xfc9739fffe1272c3 > Link layer: Ethernet > CA 'mlx4_2' > CA type: MT4100 > Number of ports: 1 > Firmware version: 2.35.5100 > Hardware version: 1 > Node GUID: 0x00140500b90af10c > System image GUID: 0xf4521403008f1683 > Port 1: > State: Active > Physical state: LinkUp > Rate: 56 > Base lid: 0 > LMC: 0 > SM lid: 0 > Capability mask: 0x0c010000 > Port GUID: 0x20ecbbfffeefb934 > Link layer: Ethernet > CA 'mlx4_3' > CA type: MT4100 > Number of ports: 1 > Firmware version: 2.35.5100 > Hardware version: 1 > Node GUID: 0x001405009661e607 > System image GUID: 0xf4521403008f1683 > Port 1: > State: Active > Physical state: LinkUp > Rate: 56 > Base lid: 0 > LMC: 0 > SM lid: 0 > Capability mask: 0x0c010000 > Port GUID: 0xf4c8e6fffe5abc89 > Link layer: Ethernet > CA 'mlx4_4' > CA type: MT4100 > Number of ports: 1 > Firmware version: 2.35.5100 > Hardware version: 1 > Node GUID: 0x00140500bd09e128 > System image GUID: 0xf4521403008f1683 > Port 1: > State: Active > Physical state: LinkUp > Rate: 56 > Base lid: 0 > LMC: 0 > SM lid: 0 > Capability mask: 0x0c010000 > Port GUID: 0x5828e1fffe34f919 > Link layer: Ethernet > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:03 AM, Olga Shern wrote: > >> Hi Bill, >> >> Can you please check the fw version that is installed on your ConnectX3? >> >> Thanks >> >> >> Sent from Samsung Mobile. >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Olga Shern >> Date:08/10/2015 7:55 AM (GMT+00:00) >> To: Bill O'Hara ,dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] Mellanox PMD failure w/DPDK-2.1.0 and >> MLNX_OFED-3.1-1.0.3 >> >> Hi Bill, >> >> There shouldn=E2=80=99t be any problem with what you are doing. >> We are checking this now. >> >> Best Regards, >> Olga >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org ] On Behalf >> Of Bill O'Hara >> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 6:05 AM >> To: dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Mellanox PMD failure w/DPDK-2.1.0 and >> MLNX_OFED-3.1-1.0.3 >> >> Hello >> >> I wonder if anyone can suggest why previously working dpdk code may fail >> in the Mellanox pmd code in dpdk-2.1.0, seemingly due to failure to crea= te >> a "resource domain" via ibv_exp_create_res_domain(). I must admit I have= n't >> seen that verb before, and it appears to be returning null with no error >> message. >> >> The DPDK log gives these hints: >> >> PMD: librte_pmd_mlx4: 0xa4fc20: TX queues number update: 0 -> 1 >> PMD: librte_pmd_mlx4: 0xa4fc20: RX queues number update: 0 -> 1 >> PMD: librte_pmd_mlx4: 0xa4fc20: RD creation failure: Cannot allocate >> memory >> >> I'm using dpdk-2.10.0 and MLNX_OFED_LINUX-3.1-1.0.3 on ubuntu14.04 with= a >> connectx-3 card. >> >> thanks >> bill >> > >