Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Hi Wenzhuo, Now I am using rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list to configure the PF with the list of mc_addr supported by the VF, but interestingly only 1 of the mc_addr works and for other mc_addr packets does not even come up to the VF/DPDK PMD. PMD: ixgbe_update_mc_addr_list_vf(): ix

Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Hi Dey, I'm confused. rte_eth_allmulticast_enable means the port can receive all the multicast packets. In another word, it's multicast promiscuous mode. rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list means adding a series of multicast addresses to the filter, so the port can receive these specific multicast packe

Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Hi Wenzhuo, There is nothing set with the rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list and we are trying to receive the NS packet which has the destination MAC set as 33 33 ff 00 00 14. Also what I saw is that the handling of allmulticast_enable message in the kernel has happened after 4.0 version and the PF d

Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Hi Souvik, To my opinion, rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list has nothing to do with rte_eth_allmulticast_enable. rte_eth_allmulticast_enable is enough for the multicast packets. I'm curious about the 1, what MAC addresses are set by rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list? 2, What multicast packets are sent? Tha

Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Adding wenzhuo...@intel.com From: Dey, Souvik Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 12:27 PM To: 'dev@dpdk.org' Subject: ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF Hi All, I am trying to support multicast packet over SRIOV using kernel PF + DPDK VF(ix

[dpdk-dev] ixgbevf: support multicast packets from PF to VF

Hi All, I am trying to support multicast packet over SRIOV using kernel PF + DPDK VF(ixgbevf) drivers for ipv6. I am currently using 2.1 DPDK and found that there was a patch in 16.04 for "ixgbe: support multicast promiscuous mode on VF". So I have backported the patch to the 2.1