From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EDC1903; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 04:17:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Feb 2015 19:11:57 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,664,1418112000"; d="scan'208";a="691915758" Received: from kmsmsx152.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.73.87]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Feb 2015 19:17:46 -0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.154) by KMSMSX152.gar.corp.intel.com (172.21.73.87) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 11:17:44 +0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.161]) by shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.62]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 11:17:43 +0800 From: "Zhang, Helin" To: lhffjzh , 'Thomas Monjalon' Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Why only rx queue "0" can receive network packet by i40e NIC Thread-Index: AdBSe++3hYejogolSOOWUQUj62OZbAAdqO6QAARY9PA= Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 03:17:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1416936405-25333-1-git-send-email-ssujith@cisco.com> <03fb01d05269$fe8d2110$fba76330$@com> <1566601.Xkl8jJDb44@xps13> <046801d052f8$9090a530$b1b1ef90$@com> In-Reply-To: <046801d052f8$9090a530$b1b1ef90$@com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "maintainers@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Why only rx queue "0" can receive network packet by i40e NIC 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: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 03:17:52 -0000 Hi Haifeng > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of lhffjzh > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 9:48 AM > To: 'Thomas Monjalon' > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; maintainers@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Why only rx queue "0" can receive network packet = by > i40e NIC >=20 > Hi Thomas, >=20 > Thanks very much for your reminder, you give me many help in this mail li= st. >=20 > The issue with detailed information just as below. but I don't know who i= s the > dpdk i40e maintainers? is maintainers@dpdk.org? >=20 > Hardware list: > 2 i40e 40G NICs > Xeon E5-2670 v2(10 cores) > 32G memory >=20 > I loopback 2 i40e NICs by QSFP cable, one NIC send UDP network packet by > DPDK, and another for receiving. I bind 4 processor's logical cores with = 4 rx > queue "0,1,2,3" on receiving NIC, when I start to send packet, only rx qu= eue > "0" > can receive > the UDP packet, the others queue always receive nothing. but it is work w= ell on > ixgbe 10G NICs, I can receive network packet from all rx queues. does any= one > kindly know why? Could you help to list the DPDK version you are using now? Two possible reasons: 1. UDP rss is not enabled on your board correctly. I40e has different rss flags from ixgbe, so I am wondering if you use it c= orrectly. In addition, this will be unified from 2.0. So I care about the DPDK versi= on. 2. The UDP stream is occasionally hit the hash key of queue 0. You'd better to try to send your UDP stream with random 5-tuples, to get t= he hash value hit different queues randomly. Regards, Helin >=20 >=20 > Regards, > Haifeng >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:55 PM > To: lhffjzh > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: Why only rx queue "0" can receive network packet by i40e NIC >=20 > 2015-02-27 16:47, lhffjzh: > > Hi All, > > > > We use 4 cores loop 4 rx queues on one i40e port, but only rx queue "0" > can > > receive network packet, do anyone kindly know why? BTW, all of network > > packet has same destination ip address but has more than 200 different > > source ip address. >=20 > It's possible that you don't have any answer for 2 reasons: > - you replied in a thread dedicated to Cisco enic questions > - you didn't describe your usage enough to understand your problem >=20 > I suggest to use the button "new email" instead of "reply all" to > start a new question with enough details. >=20 > Did you noticed you put some Cisco guys in CC instead of putting the > Intel responsible for i40e (see MAINTAINERS file)? >=20