Hi again! I realise my message might not have been so clear.
I will try to clarify. I am doing PM with software timestamping. igb versions: version: 3.0.6-k2 firmware-version: 0.147-0 I do timestamping (NTP format) of the packets in the same place for all protocols. (in igb_clean_rx_irq_adv()). For these non ip packets like IEEE 801.2ag CFM ETH-DM (ethertype 0x8902) I get quite a lot worse accuracy in the timestamping. For UDP/IP TWAMP I get for 10k pps a max delay of around 140us back to back. For CFM ETH DM I get for the same packet rate and packet size a max delay of around 900us. So my hypothesis was: Could FW be putting these L2 packets in another queue with different characteristics? I tried to add a ET-type filter as written in my previous mail but it showed no difference. Thanks for any help given! On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Mattias Barthel <mattiasbart...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > Im getting quite bad latency when using the igb driver on i350 on linux > regarding > ETH CFM packets. This compared to TWAMP (IPv4 UDP packets). > The environment is KVM with the i350 devices in PCI-passthrough. > > So i figured I add an own rx-queue (filter) for those types of ethernet > protocol packets. > > This is what i added: > > > wr32(E1000_ETQF(4), > (1 << 31) | /* queue enable */ > (E1000_ETQF_FILTER_ENABLE) | /* enable filter */ > (1 << 29) | /* enable immediate interrupt */ > (0x4 << 16) | /* queue no. 4 */ > (ETH_P_8021AG)); /* 0x8902 CFM eth protocol type */ > > > ETH_P_8021A is 0x8902 > > > > Is this a correct/good approach? > > Thanks in advance! > > -- > Mattias Barthel > -- Mattias Barthel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
