From: Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>
To: "users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] RX of multi-segment jumbo frames
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 06:59:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <de1b183d-b28d-8dc0-a1fd-d528dc9163c8@filipjaniszewski.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2ACB2CB5-241D-44AC-8203-5E2827885150@intel.com>
Unfortunately I didn't get much help from the maintainers at Mellanox,
but I discovered that with DPDK 18.05 there's the flag
ignore_offload_bitfield which once toggled to 1 along with the offloads
set to DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME|DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER allows DPDK to
capture Jumbo on Mellanox:
https://doc.dpdk.org/api-18.05/structrte__eth__rxmode.html
In DPDK 19.02 this flag is missing and I can't capture Jumbos with my
current configuration.
Sadly, even if setting ignore_offload_bitfield to 1 fix my problem it
creates a bunch more, the packets coming in are not timestamped for
example (setting hw_timestamp to 1 does not fix the issue as the
timestamp are still EPOCH + some ms.).
Not sure if this can trigger any idea, for me it is not completely clear
what was the purpose of ignore_offload_bitfield (removed later) and how
to enable Jumbos properly.
What I've attempted so far (apart from the ignore_offload_bitfield):
1) Set mtu to 9600 (rte_eth_dev_set_mtu)
2) Configure port with offloads DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER |
DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME, max_rx_pkt_len set to 9600
3) Configure RX queue with default_rxconf (from rte_eth_dev_info) adding
the offloads from the port configuration (DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER |
DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME)
The JF are reported as ierror in rte_eth_stats.
Thanks
Il 09/02/19 16:36, Wiles, Keith ha scritto:
>
>
>> On Feb 9, 2019, at 9:27 AM, Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Il 09/02/19 14:51, Wiles, Keith ha scritto:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Feb 9, 2019, at 5:11 AM, Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'm attempting to receive jumbo frames (~9000 bytes) on a Mellonox card
>>>> using DPDK, I've configured the DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME offload for
>>>> rte_eth_conf and rte_eth_rxconf (per RX Queue), but I can capture jumbo
>>>> frames only if the mbuf is large enough to contain the whole packet, is
>>>> there a way to enable DPDK to chain the incoming data in mbufs smaller
>>>> than the actual packet?
>>>>
>>>> We don't have many of those big packets coming in, so would be optimal
>>>> to leave the mbuf size to RTE_MBUF_DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE and then configure
>>>> the RX device to chain those bufs for larger packets, but can't find a
>>>> way to do it, any suggestion?
>>>>
>>>
>>> the best i understand is the nic or pmd needs to be configured to split up packets between mbufs in the rx ring. i look in the docs for the nic and see if it supports splitting up packets or ask the maintainer from the maintainers file.
>>
>> I can capture jumbo packets with Wireshark on the same card (same port,
>> same setup), which let me think the problem is purely on my DPDK card
>> configuration.
>>
>> According to ethtools, the jumbo packet (from now on JF, Jumbo Frame) is
>> detected at phy level, the couters rx_packets_phy, rx_bytes_phy,
>> rx_8192_to_10239_bytes_phy are properly increased.
>>
>> There was an option to setup manually the support for JF but was remove
>> from DPDK after version 16.07: CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_MLX5_SGE_WR_N.
>> According to the release note:
>>
>> .
>> Improved jumbo frames support, by dynamically setting RX scatter gather
>> elements according to the MTU and mbuf size, no need for compilation
>> parameter ``MLX5_PMD_SGE_WR_N``
>> .
>>
>> Not quire sure where to look for..
>>
>
> maintainer is your best bet now.
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> BR, Filip
>>>> +48 666 369 823
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Keith
>>>
>>
>> --
>> BR, Filip
>> +48 666 369 823
>
> Regards,
> Keith
>
--
BR, Filip
+48 666 369 823
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-15 5:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-09 11:11 Filip Janiszewski
2019-02-09 13:51 ` Wiles, Keith
2019-02-09 15:27 ` Filip Janiszewski
2019-02-09 15:36 ` Wiles, Keith
2019-02-15 5:59 ` Filip Janiszewski [this message]
2019-02-15 13:30 ` Wiles, Keith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=de1b183d-b28d-8dc0-a1fd-d528dc9163c8@filipjaniszewski.com \
--to=contact@filipjaniszewski.com \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
--cc=users@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).