On 2020-12-12 01:54, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-12 01:45, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-12 01:20, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 23:37, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:55, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06,
On 2020-12-12 01:45, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-12 01:20, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 23:37, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:55, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020,
On 2020-12-12 01:20, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 23:37, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:55, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 202
On 11 Dec 2020, at 23:37, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:55, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> [JS] now, retu
On 2020-12-11 23:55, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducin
> On 11 Dec 2020, at 22:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
>
> On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
>>> On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> > [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
> > firs
On 2020-12-11 23:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
> first at subport and then at pipe leve
On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
> first at subport and then at pipe level, if that help in getting even
> traffic
> On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev wrote:
>
> On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
>>
>>> > [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
>>> > first at subport and then at pipe level, if that help in getting even
>>> > traffic across low bandwidth pipe
On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
> first at subport and then at pipe level, if that help in getting even
> traffic across low bandwidth pipes.
reducing subport tc from 10 to 5 period also solved the problem w
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:17:48 +0800
"HuangLiming" wrote:
> Dear Concerns,
>
>
> I found that the driver contains public IP(169.254.10.240), which leads to my
> binary
> with public IP too, which is not what I want.
> What is the function of this IP, and could the community delete it for
> secu
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 18:31
> To: Slava Ovsiienko
> Cc: Alessandro Pagani ; users@dpdk.org;
> Asaf Penso
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] DPDK 20.11 MLX5 testpmd tx_pp 'WQE index ignore
> feature is required for packet pacing'
>
> 11/1
11/12/2020 17:19, Slava Ovsiienko:
> From: Thomas Monjalon
> > 09/12/2020 17:03, Alessandro Pagani:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I am trying to run dpdk testpmd with Mellanox ConnectX4 Lx (mlx5 driver).
> > >
> > > I am specifying the tx_pp parameter to provide the packet send
> > > scheduling on mbu
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 17:48
> To: Alessandro Pagani
> Cc: users@dpdk.org; Slava Ovsiienko ; Asaf Penso
>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] DPDK 20.11 MLX5 testpmd tx_pp 'WQE index ignore
> feature is required for packet pacing'
>
> 09/1
+Cc ark maintainers
07/12/2020 15:17, HuangLiming:
> I found that the driver contains public IP(169.254.10.240), which leads to my
> binary
> with public IP too, which is not what I want.
> What is the function of this IP, and could the community delete it for
> security reasons?
>
> drivers/n
09/12/2020 17:03, Alessandro Pagani:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to run dpdk testpmd with Mellanox ConnectX4 Lx (mlx5 driver).
>
> I am specifying the tx_pp parameter to provide the packet send scheduling
> on mbuf timestamps, but the testpmd fails with the following error:
[...]
> EAL: Probe PCI d
Hi all,
I am trying to run dpdk testpmd with Mellanox ConnectX4 Lx (mlx5 driver).
I am specifying the tx_pp parameter to provide the packet send scheduling
on mbuf timestamps, but the testpmd fails with the following error:
# ./dpdk-testpmd -l 8-15 -n 4 -a 3b:00.0,tx_pp=500 -- --flow-isolate-all
Hi Team:
recently I am using ipv6 rte_flow on intel ixgbe/i40e with dpdk
18.11.2，but it doesn't works.
i40e:
testpmd cmd:
./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -l 0,1-7,15,25-31 -n 4 -- -i
--pkt-filter-mode=perfect --rxq=8 --txq=8 --nb-cores=8 --pkt-filter-size=
*128K*
test flows:
-
Dear Concerns,
I found that the driver contains public IP(169.254.10.240), which leads to my
binary
with public IP too, which is not what I want.
What is the function of this IP, and could the community delete it for security
reasons?
>>[root@localhost dpdk-19.11]# grep "169.254.10.240" -r
>-Original Message-
>From: users On Behalf Of Krauz, Pavel
>Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 10:18 AM
>To: users@dpdk.org
>Subject: [dpdk-users] Mellanox Unexpected CQE error syndrome
>
>Hello,
>I am having problem with HPE Ethernet 100Gb 2-port 841QSFP28
>Adapter which is a Mellanox adapt
20 matches
Mail list logo
