From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay76.bu.edu (relay76.bu.edu [128.197.228.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7810E5582 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 21:55:27 +0100 (CET) X-Envelope-From: doucette@bu.edu Received: from mail-vk0-f70.google.com (mail-vk0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) by relay76.bu.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id uA9KsoCe003971 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:54:50 -0500 Received: by mail-vk0-f70.google.com with SMTP id 19so174765075vko.0 for ; Wed, 09 Nov 2016 12:54:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=dNcVqOMZIMmCwzvZSobkLbcY6p6AIFQAwhIGlLBkjNk=; b=bAjprg30fLX1+2T+Bz39jWZ9oiDYsPBVt4zJ2vwQSiJpjk/OVTPZanQETybgfVOMKY y2AxS/DWCAHu6Al0SjvmHns6tSTbNa9VIW7/nfKpE9sS69WOrN+p9aQR/mUIJ6kJ/+ol mHZ8zmqkucTLHm3q81B2y5oXaZkX8RI/uY45U7AXb+hmffFIHH/lS0lIFV9g3rzfYQYu hSzfcxevxX3/5WoG0HGsG7wjhZBVUuc1JdVUGmIgCBCXWsQCa7JiS9BNZjddyS8A8OIC 5JNlMH++VIudFHPG1AZKl7MRxrbmGLOpYQILqqTmKehXL27FbUytus83PIncSdS2mXwf YOvA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvf7UZ85VqCDXmsgcKQENmDvaDf7Lp7Yb9XMPJC9JvjQwy3KC6WNOixm/5ez7g4dRtbH4mKtsEnxlZXKiUC/rntPmMIfS4trNJ2YY0nFhs8s4keBXqRlA0l0CYSb3gn6tKcKTkt4ORdJTw== X-Received: by 10.31.203.3 with SMTP id b3mr1112293vkg.131.1478724889840; Wed, 09 Nov 2016 12:54:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.31.203.3 with SMTP id b3mr1112283vkg.131.1478724889627; Wed, 09 Nov 2016 12:54:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.135.211 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:54:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Cody Doucette Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:54:49 -0500 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] rte_eth_link_get() issue for bonded interface X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 20:55:27 -0000 I've resolved this, so in case anyone sees this problem in the future: it is expected behavior to an extent. It can take a couple of seconds for slaves to be activated, so when checking whether a bonded link is up, try wrapping it in a loop to repeatedly check until the slaves have been activated. They are polled every 10 milliseconds, but in my experience it takes a couple of seconds for the bonded link to be recognized as up. On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Cody Doucette wrote: > Hello, > > I've been experimenting with the bonding features of DPDK. If you take the > bond sample application and add a call to rte_eth_link_get() after you > start the bonded interface, it indicates the link is down, even though > there were no errors in creating the bonded interface, adding slaves, and > starting it. > > Looking at the bonding driver, it seems that bond_ethdev_link_update() is > setting the link status to down because the number of active slaves is 0. > This could be because the active slave count only seems to be incremented > if a slave is added *after* the bonded device is started. > > So is there a bug in the bond sample application or in the bonding driver? > Or is this expected behavior? > > Thanks for any info! > Cody >