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 D75F9A0613 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:47:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378B4152A; Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:47:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f45.google.com (mail-vs1-f45.google.com [209.85.217.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87DC9E4 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:47:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f45.google.com with SMTP id m22so3483049vsl.9 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2019 01:47:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BBXXP7Q5YY8/fpK6LW24XliW9OgHO/tJL4Wp6ZQxIqI=; b=rqQePuhAxqz2A9eMdEFETY3l6WGHkduBWzc6RQDlTTiOw9aySHZDSDiNpH6a4CAP8b sd9DKoc31Y7UMW9pHAR02JCBZBQ+H3yCKJn252dmU4jWzy3gF6wnLoQ+12e1xPLud3hx 7n8gMRBoXKGESfpDI4sM9tr++XB7HLNqncycRNqn92h7X5B3u340lLwJFQLGmeL9YQgd wiNmxnbPyXh9sW6rD4k/I5dKo50akwr8s77t2FcjaZXZ+EvDijO3bkDTgkCR4+dXsL+9 GqRT3ociyrba3iwjXHszxWw19k6X/fo605NYnvTcqzRIySerSF+qexaCgW2H3FzDQm9n uAWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BBXXP7Q5YY8/fpK6LW24XliW9OgHO/tJL4Wp6ZQxIqI=; b=c4T/zp5KiNwUktIsGcVJhQcAdJzEJWwspcVSfl94UDeXeE+Q5NV60VmMCUAySVs2pa GGfpv0nOtw4BlTG5up1Nmm6D20oyjSK1T+7GlJv/xRozMi9xgA5NozNKEDmtsiH4shu1 Y7JbKsoRyEGhZgl3LvAVfGq0jZjT9Ucc4N7aYorKQw9KMTWR8/ImR0jLdn66wue9Y+Gj 5qZ83tkWGDaD1ngZgztPgWj4Ou1I44w8SqMYA/kiCf4UBNx+miKWn8l/OYGd66r1vREy 6LCS2SQzAQbFMqGIIdcj/n2x6TO0L7W2fa9/pVcOtR3644/GQWP8eJcNAX7we5gcBMTb U2/w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXXYV5G1Av5djxjCjkqWbzJx1e1RQTxzbSJqk0sUd7f4/yl+e+I nMQSJhapaNOYZTqbQYysz9y2zPgiTzpz/Dpmyx4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz0+JN3YPDOSl4TclJWabKlPVYhCRSrlevx1j1vaAqhBluXTHPBA94gQ6td6j2v1AecETZszzKC1YnTrg8ecgE= X-Received: by 2002:a67:c181:: with SMTP id h1mr4729875vsj.195.1569660459115; Sat, 28 Sep 2019 01:47:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190925221637.11fb9632@hermes.lan> In-Reply-To: From: Gaurav Bansal Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:17:26 +0530 Message-ID: To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] packet drops with missing rxdIdx count in vmxnet3 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 all, Tried to debug this further and found that there is a skip in the rxdIdx count as seen in the logs below. And 'rxdIdx' index is incremented by the NIC itself. Any ideas on why the 'rxdIdx' count (say 5 as seen below) may be missing ? Any suggestions to try to find the root cause of missing rx index ? PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): rxd idx: 0 ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): rxd idx: 1 ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): rxd idx: 2 ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): rxd idx: 3 ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): *rxd idx: 4* ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): *rxd idx: 6* ring idx: 0. PMD: vmxnet3_recv_pkts(): rxd idx: 7 ring idx: 0. thanks, gaurav On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 1:25 PM Gaurav Bansal wrote: > Thanks Stephen for the reply. I am planning to try that but that will > require some major changes & lot more time, as this library is tightly > integrated with our code base. Meanwhile please let me know if there is > anything that can be tried on 16.04 itself. > thanks, > gaurav > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:46 AM Stephen Hemminger < > stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:45:03 +0530 >> Gaurav Bansal wrote: >> >> > any suggestions here ? >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 4:09 PM Gaurav Bansal >> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi all, >> > > I am using dpdk 16.04 library to process the packets on a vmware vm >> (say >> > > vm1). The traffic is sent through a client machine using apache >> bench. I am >> > > observing an issue when the number of packets reaching the vmxnet3 >> > > interface reaches the descriptor ring size (set to 2048). Till 2048 >> all the >> > > packets correctly reach the 'vmxnet3_recv_pkts' function. >> > > >> > > But as the number of packets received reaches 2048, i start seeing >> some >> > > retransmissions on the client side (as shown by tcpdump on client >> side). >> > > Then i captured the packets on the esx host destined to vm1 and it >> shows >> > > that all the original packets as well as the corresponding >> retransmissions >> > > are reaching vm1. But somehow these packets fail to reach till >> > > 'vmxnet3_recv_pkts' function (this was found by putting the >> breakpoint in >> > > 'vmxnet3_recv_pkts' function and dumping the packet contents, which >> showed >> > > that some packets don't reach here). >> > > >> > > Now 'vmxnet3_recv_pkts' is the first function which reads the packets >> from >> > > the descriptor ring and as the packets are not reaching till here, i >> am not >> > > sure on how to debug this further. Possibly some issues related to >> the ring >> > > initialization.... I enabled the init & RX logs for vmxnet3, but i >> don't >> > > see any error logs as well. I also tried looking at rxq stats and it >> shows >> > > 0 all the time : >> > > (gdb) p rxq->stats >> > > $1 = {drop_total = 0, drop_err = 0, drop_fcs = 0, >> rx_buf_alloc_failure = 0} >> > > >> > > Can anyone please provide some clues on how to debug this further ? >> Are >> > > there any known issues related to this which have been fixed post >> 16.04 >> > > version ? >> > > thanks, >> > > gaurav >> > > >> >> Try a newer version of DPDK first. >> >