From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1494D29AC for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 05:27:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1881; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1494991678; x=1496201278; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ChwHkI5tZRQxBFjT1PGeSLSY4fKhlM1kWttN62Zmr4k=; b=Xa5Tt9RvsPLwssnNlXSYq/1mw4I1/AO21MsYVt9nwyyG4PxIlTbp9Pdj NCzsM4DOsVFNOis7ZwVhq95EKsZd0BW020CSSLjE+FDIwNkECFhTKzCZT 6F7QWbRtFqo+oN5KeCdSBDocIJxyO+2ds4ze33kMALIgzj1zry6Y6b86E 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DIAADTwhtZ/5NdJa1cGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBg1WBbgeNfqdagg8Li2o/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsdC4UZBjpRAQg2QicEE4o?= =?us-ascii?q?jnEqSMYsIAQEIAgElhl+BXoMbilUFng8BkxqRbJREAR84JxgUN3AVgiyFEHaHW?= =?us-ascii?q?4ENAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,352,1491264000"; d="scan'208";a="426871090" Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 May 2017 03:27:51 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (xch-rcd-003.cisco.com [173.37.102.13]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v4H3RpDu013565 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 03:27:51 GMT Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 16 May 2017 22:27:50 -0500 Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 16 May 2017 22:27:50 -0500 From: "Neeraj Tandon (netandon)" To: "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-users] Mechanism to increase MBUF allocation Thread-Index: AQHSzr2PQ/hVFM7SpEm9pCkcw+Wbdw== Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 03:27:50 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.5.160527 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.24.28.1] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <396304AC2E8FA242AECF1BF0E4F4C87C@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Mechanism to increase MBUF allocation 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: Wed, 17 May 2017 03:27:58 -0000 Hi, I was able to increase mbuf and make it work after increasing the socket memory. However I am facing an issue of SEGfault in driver code. Intermittently after receiving sometimes few million packet at 1 Gig line rate the driver does a segment fault: (eth_igb_recv_pkts+0xd3)[0x5057a3] I have net_e1000_igb driver with two 1 Gig ports on it. Thanks in advance for any help or pointer to debug driver . EAL: Detected 24 lcore(s) EAL: Probing VFIO support... EAL: VFIO support initialized EAL: PCI device 0000:01:00.0 on NUMA socket 0 EAL: probe driver: 8086:1521 net_e1000_igb EAL: PCI device 0000:01:00.1 on NUMA socket 0 EAL: probe driver: 8086:1521 net_e1000_igb Regards, Neeraj On 5/15/17, 12:14 AM, "users on behalf of Neeraj Tandon (netandon)" wrote: >Hi, > >I have recently started using DPDK. I have based my application on l2fwd >application. In my application, I am holding buffers for a period of >time and freeing the mbuf in another thread. The default number of MBUF >is 8192 . I have two questions regarding this: > > > 1. How to increase number of MBUFS : For this increasing NB_MBUF and >calling is not having any effect I.e I loose packet when packets > 8192 >are sent in burst. I see following used for creating mbuf pool: > >/* create the mbuf pool */ >l2fwd_pktmbuf_pool =3D rte_pktmbuf_pool_create("mbuf_pool", NB_MBUF, >MEMPOOL_CACHE_SIZE, 0, RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE, >rte_socket_id()); > >If I want to increase MBUF to say 65536 what should I do ? > > 2. I am receiving packets in RX thread which is running on Core 2 >and freeing on a thread which I launched using PHREAD and runs on Core 0 >. Any implications for this kind of mechanism > >Thanks for the support and keeping forum active. > >Regards, >Neenah >