I would recommend using testpmd to test that since I didn’t get the chance to test this example application. And if you are using testpmd it would for sure work, but if it didn’t work for you let me know what errors you are getting.
Kindest regards, Raslan Darawsheh From: Cliff Burdick <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 4:26 PM To: Raslan Darawsheh <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; users <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Problem installing rules with counters on MLX5 Hi Raslan, I was seeing that error, but after filling in that field, it would not classify in any queue other than zero. Since the rte_flow code in the examples directory does not set the vlan fields properly for the mlx5 driver, it also gives the error: http://doc.dpdk.org/api/examples_2flow_filtering_2flow_blocks_8c-example.html<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fexamples_2flow_filtering_2flow_blocks_8c-example.html&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40mellanox.com%7Ce3977aa09e3d42029e5408d631d8a3ac%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636751203881163503&sdata=JgGjVj69wdu9e6x6jSPxcwcxXQhq8u8I%2FEEk9DfzSB0%3D&reserved=0> My plan was to fix the problem, test it, and submit a patch for the example. However, despite being able to get the error to go away with the correct mask, I was never able to get the flow to direct into anything other than queue 1 on dpdk 18. On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 00:43 Raslan Darawsheh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Cliff, Can you please send me what exactly you are seeing? As for the email that you are referring this is a limitation for MLX5 that it can’t have empty vlan you need to specify vid in order for it to work. Kindest regards, Raslan Darawsheh From: Cliff Burdick <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 7:11 PM To: Raslan Darawsheh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; users <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Problem installing rules with counters on MLX5 Hi Raslan, can you confirm if rte_flow is partially broken in dpdk 18 on mlx5? The example code for rte_flow is broken, and I didn't see any responses here: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/users/2018-October/003510.html<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmails.dpdk.org%2Farchives%2Fusers%2F2018-October%2F003510.html&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40mellanox.com%7Ce3977aa09e3d42029e5408d631d8a3ac%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636751203881163503&sdata=wVQWfT%2FGb0MKPiMV2Ew1pNeMxn2WfeX7Of4HJ43E03Q%3D&reserved=0> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 5:16 AM Raslan Darawsheh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Georgios, You are trying to create the same rule with three different actions. I would suggest that you change your mask to be proto is 1/6/17 This way you'll have three different rules Kindest regards, Raslan Darawsheh > -----Original Message----- > From: users <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf > Of Georgios Katsikas > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 3:01 PM > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [dpdk-users] Problem installing rules with counters on MLX5 > > Dear all, > > I am trying to install 3 simple rules (to match ICMP, TCP, and UDP flows) on a > Mellanox ConnectX-5 100 GbE NIC using DPDK's flow API. > The rules are as follows: > > 1. flow create 0 ingress pattern eth type is 2048 / ipv4 proto spec 1 > proto mask 0x0 / end actions queue index 0 / count / end > 2. flow create 0 ingress pattern eth type is 2048 / ipv4 proto spec 6 > proto mask 0x0 / end actions queue index 0 / count / end > 3. flow create 0 ingress pattern eth type is 2048 / ipv4 proto spec 17 > proto mask 0x0 / end actions queue index 0 / count / end > > Only the first rule gets properly installed. The remaining 2 rules throw the > following error: > Caught error type 1 (cause unspecified): hardware refuses to create flow > > If I try to incorporate 'count identifier <index> shared 0', I still get > error (with > or without shared). > If I try to install the same rules without action count, then everything works > as expected. > Action count on rules that match src/dst IP addresses works fine. > Could you please shed some light on this? > > I am using DPDK 18.08 with Mellanox OFED 4.4-2.0.7.0 (latest). > > Thanks, > Georgios
