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 BA125A056A for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 01:45:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C32D2C02; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 01:45:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.fortinet.com (smtp.fortinet.com [208.91.113.81]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8EAF3B5 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 01:45:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.fortinet.com ([192.168.221.133]) by smtp.fortinet.com with ESMTP id 0260jr5F011897-0260jr5H011897 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 16:45:53 -0800 Received: from FGT-EXCH-MBX132.fortinet-us.com (192.168.221.132) by FGT-EXCH-MBX133.fortinet-us.com (192.168.221.133) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1531.3; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 16:45:53 -0800 Received: from FGT-EXCH-MBX132.fortinet-us.com ([fe80::78b9:5f97:8cec:b419]) by FGT-EXCH-MBX132.fortinet-us.com ([fe80::78b9:5f97:8cec:b419%5]) with mapi id 15.01.1531.010; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 16:45:52 -0800 From: Liwu Liu To: "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: mlx5 PMD fails to receive certain icmpv6 multicast Thread-Index: AdXzTxE0nI1mz7srSrm2rbWw6UkR+Q== Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 00:45:52 +0000 Message-ID: <8e9c1a6b5c3148ecbaba453652bce127@fortinet.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [96.45.36.15] MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=fortinet.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-type:mime-version; bh=xbchXvTQ/F68T5H2XBrRmNPQKunoboafS17Ab54zKlQ=; b=IFN9XyLAmqGrx9eGvnJ8pflq19PkaQHy/SqMwBOTKfm3zix0+T5w/xUyQge/7abqiZhEphLLlSGJ tZl9hz8wQ+37B6YBqSmTt642FSy4iPpWzftZGHk1cJ/62B9M8NcD6w+5sJKdKHdUFBHgwykLPFxy G6NyzwjFJrBVbXeUt9nyxOuYM9ruaNUouP6DOPsBAF+WLf9odwbW59I/Z630zFN/hg+Fncp9YHyz ho6gGQnFdfUXJoWcqK09IGvmujzJLnoEsOYx6PqXQDnok7re6JQGv4XQYwFGdgz8JV8tAZWuNgNp cjNZRoHSQRFK38bwSQtsZ0vDR4tqvJWLvr8sKQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] mlx5 PMD fails to receive certain icmpv6 multicast 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" Hi Team, I am using the mlx5/100G in KVM guest. The host shows this PCI vfNIC is p= rovisioned to the guest: "17:01.1 Ethernet controller: Mellanox Technologies MT27800 Family = [ConnectX-5 Virtual Function]" I am using DPDK 19.11 with kind of standard configurations, and when DPDK= application runs I still have the kernel mlx5e net device present. I hav= e both promiscuous and all-multicast turned on. It works fine for IPV4, but for IPV6 it fails. It can receive packets des= tined to 33:33:00:00:00:02 (IPV6 Router solicitation), but cannot receive= packets destined to 33:33:ff:00:00:01 (IPV6 neighbor solicitation for so= me address). But if I avoid DPDK, directly use the OFED-4.6 based kernel driver, every= thing works fine as expected. I am thinking there is some mismatch happened for MLX5 PMD. Please give s= ome advice/hints. Many thanks Liwu *** Please note that this message and any attachments may contain confid= ential and proprietary material and information and are intended only for= the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipi= ent, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, disseminat= ion, distribution or copying of this message and any attachments is stric= tly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediat= ely notify the sender and destroy this e-mail and any attachments and all= copies, whether electronic or printed. Please also note that any views, = opinions, conclusions or commitments expressed in this message are those = of the individual sender and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fort= inet, Inc., its affiliates, and emails are not binding on Fortinet and on= ly a writing manually signed by Fortinet's General Counsel can be a bindi= ng commitment of Fortinet to Fortinet's customers or partners. Thank you.= ***