From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.iitb.ac.in (smtp1.iitb.ac.in [103.21.127.13]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99AEF374E for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 11:30:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from ldns2.iitb.ac.in (ldns2.iitb.ac.in [10.200.12.2]) by smtp1.iitb.ac.in (Postfix) with SMTP id 994497B for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:00:12 +0530 (IST) Received: (qmail 24344 invoked by uid 510); 20 Feb 2017 16:00:12 +0530 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from 10.200.1.25 by ldns2 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-2.11 spamassassin: 3.4.1. mhr: 1.0. {clamdscan: 0.99.2/23095} Clear:RC:1(10.200.1.25):SA:0(0.0/5.6):. Processed in 1.671631 secs; 20 Feb 2017 16:00:12 +0530 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on ldns2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.6 tests=IITB_ORIG,PROPER_IITB_MSGID autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Pyzor: Reported 0 times. X-Envelope-From: ppnaik@cse.iitb.ac.in X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received: from unknown (HELO ldns2.iitb.ac.in) (10.200.1.25) by ldns2.iitb.ac.in with SMTP; 20 Feb 2017 16:00:10 +0530 Received: from jeeves.cse.iitb.ac.in (miller.cse.iitb.ac.in [10.129.3.1]) by ldns2.iitb.ac.in (Postfix) with ESMTP id 877243418F2; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:00:10 +0530 (IST) Received: by jeeves.cse.iitb.ac.in (Postfix, from userid 51934) id 7A1598C237E; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:00:10 +0530 (IST) Received: from [10.129.41.21] (unknown [10.129.41.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jeeves.cse.iitb.ac.in (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD4948C237F; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:00:09 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <58AAC534.7000004@cse.iitb.ac.in> Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:00:12 +0530 From: Priyanka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "users@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: "mitaliyada@cse.iitb.ac.in" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [dpdk-users] seg fault in InterVM communication using virtio 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:30:13 -0000 Hi All, We have 2 VM running on qemu-kvm hypervisor. We have provided vNIC to the VMs using macvtap device and virtio as the device model in bridge mode. We are running DPDK applications (udp client and server) on the VMs. We observe that the inter-VM communication is not happening using drivers i.e igb_uio and uio_pci_generic. We were able to communicate between the VMs properly using SRIOV. But we were not getting performance as expected so we switched to virtio. But using virtio the DPDK communication hangs after sending 128 packets. We also observe a seg fault in the dmesg of the VM. Please provide us some guideline to do the inter-VM communication using virtio. Are we correct if we are using rte_eth_tx/rx_burst to send and receive packets from the vNIC. Thanks, Priyanka