From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yb0-f174.google.com (mail-yb0-f174.google.com [209.85.213.174]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A914B2BCE for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 20:14:28 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r4so4285033ybd.12 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=asu-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xY2Iz540Rx/pg5pppqt9552ZxbTp/SZzbJIHqzj+CbE=; b=alTrrnBh4A6JwaWsAOUHIRY0yHHFO9ADMZXDc3ZwHJXeZumPcpHt10o1IYXeNLFF7C QARt7MJtkEx46AXrabiIl45I6FUZqZVXof+LyWFlEgwDYRgztk6kPF4MGpG+ORjaPJ6H 6sXfJM1/BLRJHj58Go8L8lheM4gJl19pD+4CD+zliG5jMZM7zq0wULZTAQJR+kgr5RK2 xgqVZ/KuHCbx6ICPZhbNFzlem2Tf2PaMMKpn1iqUiAK/1MDjaQjr4N9m8n07TBRRP6lh 21EJ3Xz8b780Uw35+ikI5xHsSVcoZ+SmT29TmipDVjg0S/nqnlJnrsqsqgh9J20UmZ90 9FhQ== 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=xY2Iz540Rx/pg5pppqt9552ZxbTp/SZzbJIHqzj+CbE=; b=gSSgfexfac4mY3Uamb+jS7u7FYZ0Xpww0ig/Wmzzi3z2k8c8LL0lwUJdHwyPSNSA7h HkyOdcctI58iZDdv9jRh7YVqauUuD+jv9nY+cDWpsVy6WAagFh66xmc55uUHXskXjxme 2CBnJm3fpz7eD9h7xAq+Q9mRO6g/ok8VqoiwEzotNgiyOU5BU7UD2vI1FFTnkfGpPOlk p4i//7p2SWpa0j8ZW0FGF2VbE0DeQLpZu6A/RcnGms5KgCo9GG10dVGb/iolhGm0vEAn h4qdk806dnq2OPGwjEJFTA8FMWk0Hk24FCcT6ZEzhc8ECIQvEdtZ2ga5mFp/jY3YflQ3 gCeA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIZVkKAv3IyYS3X500mjA5UaMMko8rGHRpaq42Az/7v25OEnlRo HAKulIWzPobeh18PL4Utv+svRsoA46MeONtvZxOxtoY5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotNOWL7z6soaKqF9WhXFOMR5GZJT9hEbXx2YUlIcTK1BaWVuo7h8vlUpEiMvCVyRpPxaTFr9hlUbKcb1O1+Oos= X-Received: by 10.129.113.134 with SMTP id m128mr4930112ywc.342.1513278867901; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.201.135 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:13:47 -0800 (PST) From: Sungho Hong Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 12:13:47 -0700 Message-ID: To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] Preventing DPDK packet loss in L2 forwarding 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: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 19:14:29 -0000 Hello I have implemented pingpong for DPDK. with the client sending the packets and the server receiving the packets and then returning them. The server part is implemented similar to the L2 forwarding sample in the DPDK official website. While doing the L2 forwarding I have noticed that there are packet losses while I forward the the packets from the receiver queue to the transfer queue. My question is ... is there a way to make the packet loss into zero? I could not find the solution to this since the sample applications from DPDK website all have packet losses. the packet losses are counted by the callback function below rte_eth_tx_buffer_set_err_callback(tx_buffer[portid], rte_eth_tx_buffer_count_callback, &port_statistics[portid].dropped); this is the result I have from the L2 forwarding Port statistics ==================================== Statistics for port 0 ------------------------------ Packets sent: 384126 Packets received: 379889 Packets dropped: 4237 Aggregate statistics =============================== Total packets sent: 384126 Total packets received: 379889 Total packets dropped: 4237 ==================================================== since my implementation is just pingpong and have very simple implementation, I don't believe that there should be any packet losses in my case. Thank you for reading this letter Sungho Hong