> I think I might have found an error in my library's heap allocator
> which can result in duplicate references to copies of the same data
> header, which are supposed to be different headers. This could explain
> some of my problems if the above usage is correct. I will continue
> investigating th
> I suspect that mbufs in use are put into mempool somehow.
> Which functions do you use to free mbufs to the pool
> on processing paths that do not end with `rte_eth_tx_burst()`?
> You can build DPDK with `-Dc_args='-DRTE_LIBRTE_MBUF_DEBUG'`
> to enable debug checks in the library.
I am using rte
2025-01-06 11:05 (UTC-0500), Alan Beadle:
> There is definitely something going wrong with the mbuf allocator.
> Each run results in such different errors that it is difficult to add
> instrumentation for a specific one, but one frequent error is that a
> newly allocated mbuf already has a refcnt o
> Note that I am also seeing another error. Sometimes, rather than tx
> failing, my app detects incorrect/corrupted mbuf contents and exits
> immediately. It appears that mbufs are being re-allocated when they
> should not be. I thought I had finally solved this (see my earlier
> threads) but with
> So, "deamon" and "server" may try using the same queue sometimes, correct?
> Synchronizing all access to the single queue should work in this case.
That is correct.
> BTW, rte_eth_tx_burst() returning >0 does not mean the packets have been sent.
> It only means they have been enqueued for sendi
2025-01-04 14:16 (UTC-0500), Alan Beadle:
> I am setting up one tx queue and one rx queue via the primary process
> init code. The code here resembles the "basic forwarding" sample
> application (in the skeleton/ subdir). Please let me know whether it
> would be possible for each process to use ent
> Thread-unsafe are queues, not calls to rte_eth_rx/tx_burst().
> You can call rte_eth_rx/tx_burst() concurrently without synchronization
> if they operate on different queues.
> Typically you assign each lcore to operate on one or more queues,
> but no queue to be operated by multiple lcores.
> Ot
2025-01-04 11:22 (UTC-0500), Alan Beadle:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm still stuck on this. Most likely I am doing something wrong in the
> initialization phase. I am trying to follow the standard code example
> for symmetric multi-process, but since my code is doing very different
> things from this ex
Hi everyone,
I'm still stuck on this. Most likely I am doing something wrong in the
initialization phase. I am trying to follow the standard code example
for symmetric multi-process, but since my code is doing very different
things from this example I cannot even begin to guess where I am going
wr
Hi everyone,
I am working on a multi-process DPDK application. It uses one NIC, one
port, and both separate processes send as well as receive, and they
share memory for synchronization and IPC.
I had previously made a mistake in setting up the lcores, and all of
the processes were assigned to the
10 matches
Mail list logo
