From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7437AA04C6 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C8A2B87; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-4.sys.kth.se (smtp-4.sys.kth.se [130.237.48.193]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4972B86 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-4.sys.kth.se (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-4.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA7D2A71; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:56 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-4.sys.kth.se ([127.0.0.1]) by smtp-4.sys.kth.se (smtp-4.sys.kth.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id w4wZzDMxo-To; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from exdb01.ug.kth.se (exdb01.ug.kth.se [192.168.32.111]) by smtp-4.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD9496745; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:53 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kth.se; s=default; t=1573741675; bh=PlncmaB+tQQ1Ulj1fihf8Edl0ApXgON1H5r079Zyu2I=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To; b=hgsQWKHqJymhRLwk/0ukb7sab2/ybnED0iuWhpcaz8z45KhUilfbq7IUHTALpWVfb izUvpHBqWRn8dcnooHGQ0IQX6r+klOYqQxwZrCZLm+J0cYhfSydFRxt7+JfW4RXPLw Tojb0WjGY3+yntT+g2C9M/6TMtSgiXRsO+4sctWY= Received: from exdb03.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.113) by exdb01.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:32 +0100 Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.115) by exdb03.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:32 +0100 Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) by exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.005; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:27:32 +0100 From: Tom Barbette To: "Pathak, Pravin" , sachin gupta , "users@dpdk.org" , "Nutman, Richard" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-users] Sequential UDP packets Thread-Index: AQHVmfflYcYQgiVdokWUustTywCfXKeIy/iAgABiWgCAAAHLgIABiv1I Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 14:27:31 +0000 Message-ID: <1573741650466.66525@kth.se> References: <9b57baa273c94968b859577e5a384245@DCRIC1EXC05PA.mcp.local> <1289692801.260299.1573659988061@mail.yahoo.com>, <168A68C163D584429EF02A476D52744268C02F03@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <168A68C163D584429EF02A476D52744268C02F03@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: fr-FR, sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [91.176.21.55] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Sequential UDP packets X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Are they from the same UDP flow? Else RSS and multi-queing in general could= lead to this.=0A= =0A= Tom=0A= ________________________________________=0A= De : users de la part de Pathak, Pravin =0A= Envoy=E9 : mercredi 13 novembre 2019 16:52=0A= =C0 : sachin gupta; users@dpdk.org; Nutman, Richard=0A= Objet : Re: [dpdk-users] Sequential UDP packets=0A= =0A= Hi Sarvesh -=0A= How are you generating and sending UDP packets? Can you describe a bit more= on send and receive configuration?=0A= Pravin=0A= =0A= -----Original Message-----=0A= From: users On Behalf Of sachin gupta=0A= Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 10:46 AM=0A= To: users@dpdk.org; Nutman, Richard =0A= Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Sequential UDP packets=0A= =0A= Hi Sarvesh, Richard=0A= In general any router is not supposed to re-order the packets, even when th= e packets are received from outside.In this case, the packets are created i= nternally only. So as such UDP protocol makes no difference.=0A= One reason i can think is the use of multiple queues, or threads for transm= ission.=0A= Sachin=0A= On Wednesday, November 13, 2019, 03:24:35 PM GMT+5:30, Nutman, Richard = wrote:=0A= =0A= Hi Sarvesh,=0A= =0A= UDP is not a reliable protocol, not even for the order of packets you recei= ve.=0A= You have to re-order them when you receive them. For example using a sequen= ce number to index them into a circular buffer.=0A= =0A= Wireshark does not re-order UDP packets but merely shows them in the order = they were captured.=0A= =0A= Regards,=0A= Richard=0A= =0A= > -----Original Message-----=0A= > From: Sarvesh Verma [mailto:sarveshfwecverma79@gmail.com]=0A= > Sent: 13 November 2019 07:56=0A= > To: users@dpdk.org=0A= > Subject: [dpdk-users] Sequential UDP packets=0A= >=0A= > Hey DPDK users,=0A= >=0A= > Since last two months I'm struggling to generate my own sequential UDP=0A= > packets through DPDK. At receiving side my packets counts are matching=0A= > but are not in sequence in Wireshark.=0A= > Expected- 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.........=0A= > Getting-1,4,6,8,9,2,3,5,7,10........=85=0A= >=0A= > Hope anyone will reply soon.=0A= >=0A= > Thank you=0A= > Sarvesh Verma=0A= =0A= =0A= **********************************************************************=0A= DISCLAIMER:=0A= Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message= . If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or de= liver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message= and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinio= ns or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the compan= y are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.=0A= =0A=