From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <amihay.sobel@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-oi0-f44.google.com (mail-oi0-f44.google.com
 [209.85.218.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388CF2A5E
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 12:46:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-oi0-f44.google.com with SMTP id x10so1539085oig.2
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 03:46:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=kyyyoZx5h39UxHH+NkqfkEk7c/mbSzqs45KN1tPJVCA=;
 b=MBcSL6YZmZfFBtGUJhfeU28pQqqR3PvnVD0wge1H6izm0HUVSl0Q3GiL+KAFFwHcK5
 OuKj5VvdIVtqRaYiqOq+HV119+PgFFsiHcB2w9hDvoKrU6lQ2aZ01iBos1mWFrBj6yt5
 rdxbruHuPtDH5w+qprbcSh4JCeA047Q9JY1aRiwyuI5zo5vgSv155VrccdMvfJnMIyg2
 beBG0zRSv1a41jjX7KJrYVm9ilvUG/9UmKxGCkU0uVK71a8u6+i9eLfVIJFMtDfc0uau
 kPah+ae17RC8+N4Er+CB8RFNnUOrXfYSB/P9uKGtuNVdWiDrr38XfkZberRW8Dpr+oyT
 CUOg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=kyyyoZx5h39UxHH+NkqfkEk7c/mbSzqs45KN1tPJVCA=;
 b=eF924orHvS7BrcHZNQmN93kBocKQynmhbvPniZSHZ2YJPMYdqBolSYhHN0ihB+Rg8M
 FfhzgSu/jo96bCKYzIZpxDFwMT4KgknRu/hLniOgT6Ag7M7Ct/oLb/9IxyWw+zRwwjZl
 PsnilwsHYfbOq5sApEYKpabxE1OVENvG1KwwVVGnt7rpL8gUgk2zsDaztA4IzIeGBewj
 B473feNg/Qw+zt2rvPEsEEnB/NcdNKU1my8UPrXcKScyM8XiBEcdSLjMuULXaQ2ZxIOc
 7Qd5rGeXCcxtJMxqNcPLvsITw/w1+LS//9Bf7JAXLkXo9hcWKaZJ/cHvA5CWCHUbcH1e
 PY8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCk0mhFoyCZv8CjBi9+ls3ctYdSaB/Hp5AgbdLIhwN1/wFgPoQw
 DmbEPRlbbvyjjdWbgSmGyaahRz65Ecl7pY6nH+XuFw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuEbXF+6op47IVnDANBpNNfqmT0btKDsVQh38vytQpWXRy2O0AqKzjXH2UMlj6r3T+OprQg00BsK/uJKFCNR1Y=
X-Received: by 10.202.215.86 with SMTP id o83mr6932041oig.249.1519818414248;
 Wed, 28 Feb 2018 03:46:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.74.28.153 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 03:46:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Amihay Sobel <amihay.sobel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 13:46:53 +0200
Message-ID: <CAA1AJP08Q=M8DT069hWVErNdokXLEm4Jz1-t6ZqeatL29dBX=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: users@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-users] fail to send jumbo packets with fm10k PMD driver
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 11:46:55 -0000

 Hello all,

I am using the fm10k PMD driver with vector optimization enabled.
I noticed that the jumbo packets feature is not working for TX (configured
jumbo_frame = 1, enable_scatter = 1 and max_rx_pkt_len = 9000).
I am able to receive the jumbo packets correctly, but they are not sent on
TX (i suspect that the fm10k TX vector driver is only sending the first
segment of the
jumbo frame chain)
Do you know if there is any solution for the above problem, is this problem
known or is it suppose to work?

When working with the non vector PMD driver, i notice that i am only able
to send packets compound of 4 segments (4 mbuf's) and then the max size
depends
on the mbuf size.

Is this a correct observation and is it a known limit or can this be
changed?

Thanks
Amihay