From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from escorpcc.sonicwall.com (mail1.sonicwall.com [67.115.118.17]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263101B53 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 04:26:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from escorpcc.sonicwall.com (127.0.0.1) id h9pr6c0171sb for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:26:29 -0800 (envelope-from ) Received: from US0EXC12.us.sonicwall.com ([10.50.129.83]) by escorpcc.sonicwall.com ([10.50.128.141]) (SonicWall 9.2.2.5291) with ESMTPS (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) id o201901280326290073975-23; Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:26:29 -0800 Received: from US0EXC11.us.sonicwall.com (10.50.129.82) by US0EXC12.us.sonicwall.com (10.50.129.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1034.26; Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:26:29 -0800 Received: from US0EXC11.us.sonicwall.com ([fe80::404a:3697:e0d7:364d]) by US0EXC11.us.sonicwall.com ([fe80::404a:3697:e0d7:364d%19]) with mapi id 15.01.1034.033; Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:26:28 -0800 From: Jasmine Sanghvi To: "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: binding PF and VF to DPDK Thread-Index: AQHUtrkUwSdpyexpLEu7X2ZPFGwKWA== Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 03:26:28 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.50.129.45] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mlf-Version: 9.2.2.5291 X-Mlf-License: BSVKCAPET_ X-Mlf-UniqueId: o201901280326290073975 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:43:44 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] binding PF and VF to DPDK 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: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 03:26:30 -0000 Hi: Our environment: DPDK Version: 18.02 Kernel: 4.14.56 NIC: XL710/i40e/i40evf SRIOV (linux i40e driver version 2.7.11 / i40ef driver version 3.6.10) On host, we create n VFs on the physical device, by setting /sys/bus/pci/device/$PF/sriov_numvfs. Our dpdk application that binds to these VFs and does some packet processin= g. PF stays bound to Linux i40e driver. We are not using the Linux PF interfac= e for any other purpose. Under continuous heavy load we find that our application stops receiving traffic after a while. dmesg displays a msg to the tune of "TX driver issue detected, PF reset iss= ued". Looking at the i40e linux driver code, it appears that i40e is detecting "M= alicious driver". I don't see any way to disable "Malicious Driver Detection" in i40e driver (no module parameter). Alternative was to bind PF also to dpdk (igb_uio) and not start PF eth dev. However when I bind PF to dpdk, all VFs disappear. I tried binding PF before and after...same result. After I bind PF to dpdk= , rte_eth_dev_count() only reflects PF and cannot get dev_info corresponding = to VFs. My question is can PF and VFs be both bound to DPDK? Thanks, Jasmine