Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-31 Thread Nélio Laranjeiro
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 01:16:51PM +, Legacy, Allain wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 4:35 AM > <...> > > + Olga Shern, > > > > Allain, > > > > Thanks for all this tests, for this last point i

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-31 Thread Legacy, Allain
> -Original Message- > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 4:35 AM <...> > + Olga Shern, > > Allain, > > Thanks for all this tests, for this last point is seems to be a firmware or > hardware issue, I don't have any way to help on that

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-31 Thread Nélio Laranjeiro
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 04:53:47PM +, Legacy, Allain wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 9:03 AM > <...> > > I found an issue on the id retrieval while receiving an high rate of the > > same flo

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-30 Thread Legacy, Allain
> -Original Message- > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 9:03 AM <...> > I found an issue on the id retrieval while receiving an high rate of the > same flow [1]. You may face the same issue. Can you verify with the > patch? > >

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-30 Thread Nélio Laranjeiro
Hi Allain, On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:29:59PM +, Legacy, Allain wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 5:45 AM > > <...> > > > Almost... the only difference is that the ETH pattern also checks fo

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-29 Thread Legacy, Allain
> -Original Message- > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 5:45 AM <...> > > Almost... the only difference is that the ETH pattern also checks for > type=0x8100 > > Ethernet type was not supported in DPDK 17.02, it was submitted lat

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-29 Thread Nélio Laranjeiro
I Allain, Please see below On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 04:16:08PM +, Legacy, Allain wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 11:36 AM > <..> > > If I understand correctly, your application is adding 500

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-28 Thread Legacy, Allain
> -Original Message- > From: Nélio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranje...@6wind.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 11:36 AM <..> > If I understand correctly, your application is adding 500 rules like: > > flow create 0 ingress pattern eth src is dst is / vlan vid is > / end action mark

Re: [dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-28 Thread Nélio Laranjeiro
Hi Allain, My attempt to reproduce it was a failure, may be I missed something, please see below, On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:42:05PM +, Legacy, Allain wrote: > Hi, > I am setting up an experiment to gauge the usability of the flow API > and the flow marking behavior of the CX4. I am working

[dpdk-dev] mlx5 flow create/destroy behaviour

2017-03-28 Thread Legacy, Allain
Hi, I am setting up an experiment to gauge the usability of the flow API and the flow marking behavior of the CX4. I am working from v17.02. I am seeing some unpredictable behavior that I am unsure of the cause. This is the layout of the test: 2 x CX4 (15b3:1015) + 1 port used