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 574BBA052F for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:47:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FE0910B7; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:47:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qv1-f43.google.com (mail-qv1-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09051F5 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:47:28 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qv1-f43.google.com with SMTP id t6so907172qvs.5 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:47:28 -0800 (PST) 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=2Dhb26cQnUCJM+/3kWX8UcJbkAfUyH8mgE6a2CXyZ7Y=; b=C5JBzOL0VeeSpw2+BE0It4sGJmUQAJpXmggFfY1c5y4qEaprJraUrs9IYqrCjsgyqP KPWA2RfxZk4uxKrMh26c46YKnbgyyzyl6vItrTg04e9k6FXJQmkgfQEhmghPz7dLwNor K1jVlD2ugdAG4idEqhc2yzfK8nGtTWrTxbPGAhAtmhSjGzSLXYxB7pBtF1/kfU4h1wJd TzYAqaaSjTKqlp4WvMqFEgL39qxdrhEmBandPyUp890hwBoTkS2FuG/RVO09C8psiMnB pO0RR5IkT7dPq/cZ6H153kmigCNom0lvm7KMLOQvEVXE/mUpFl/d0YB33R8kQhmtkneH pm/Q== 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=2Dhb26cQnUCJM+/3kWX8UcJbkAfUyH8mgE6a2CXyZ7Y=; b=nJcZnen5PangiC9PIBs3WVCWJm/b4inRz33SMpB2sI3AHZFhW1MLfWINrVpMcAH9zj RkYaui7+5Ap+0kFnRvQ63guCrQ60jyfMEAsmshuxaBIUdRBOOyIR1g8Tel1LYBsHfgta 99yS/XJ/NL/oM6eb+Q6Mxgu1pG32dbpoSKZpkS/Gv/ciC92MGvsYEw7uR5AyHQIIqh65 MX6iwgPIb+0qsYbEsEaPG192AcGgwpniOXo1yOGepVDNu6ObnAwsCipzw+zcCBIYKLXW dNUJ5bMlCvDXxU+pKVxC2O8U642YCnb8LXj0J9IpjnrRdtNKsy2bg7f7hxdryEqvrzpT hNMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXBu3oZUOr+PBeLMi8vWpHL49yqQkwDFh3XYf1dvQPondR9ssVq rBsiVUjh6vy4CXNdAjOtF6bZ9kcRugm2vPE09KY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzC4/q45DtBau7RnZS0mu83+xSlAwzgDnwDAqHqXnd6t4Y0UZLy5pgc482ijyC9ZeKR4EaUXXK9OEeTkZe3lNc= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:e4cc:: with SMTP id g12mr3237497qvm.237.1579585648263; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:47:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:47:16 +0500 Message-ID: To: Dominic Chen Cc: users Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Same port receive/transmit loopback 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" Hey there, have you used packetgen to verify. Build pktgen app and loopback your cable to recieve what you send on the port to verify please On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 3:34 AM Dominic Chen wrote: > I've just started working with DPDK recently, and I'm a little confused > by the intended behavior when transmitting and receiving on the same port. > > Currently, I haven't been able to receive the same packet that I > transmitted, regardless of the source/destination MACs on the Ethernet > packet (broadcast, self, etc), or whether the port is in promiscuous > mode. I've verified from other hosts on the network that my packets are > being sent, that I am able to receive packets (as long as I didn't send > them), and that I get the same behavior when using vfio-pci with both > e1000 and vmxnet3 (emulated in VMware). > > Is there some built-in source MAC filtering that I'm missing? Or do I > have to enable loopback mode? > > Thanks, > > Dominic > > >