Message ID | 1444721365-1065-1-git-send-email-xutao.sun@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded, archived |
Headers |
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> X-Original-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A988E6E; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:29:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30B8C2FDD for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:29:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 00:29:41 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,677,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="825626488" Received: from shvmail01.sh.intel.com ([10.239.29.42]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 00:29:32 -0700 Received: from shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (shecgisg004.sh.intel.com [10.239.29.89]) by shvmail01.sh.intel.com with ESMTP id t9D7TUO5012686; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:29:30 +0800 Received: from shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id t9D7TQ0k001127; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:29:28 +0800 Received: (from xutaosun@localhost) by shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id t9D7TQL5001122; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:29:26 +0800 From: Xutao Sun <xutao.sun@intel.com> To: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:29:25 +0800 Message-Id: <1444721365-1065-1-git-send-email-xutao.sun@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.4.1 Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/vmdq: Fix the core dump issue when mem_pool is more than 34 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> |
Commit Message
Xutao Sun
Oct. 13, 2015, 7:29 a.m. UTC
Macro MAX_QUEUES was defined to 128, only allow 16 mem_pools in theory.
When running vmdq_app with more than 34 mem_pools,
it will cause the core_dump issue.
Change MAX_QUEUES to 1024 will solve this issue.
Signed-off-by: Xutao Sun <xutao.sun@intel.com>
---
examples/vmdq/main.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
Hi Xutao, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Xutao Sun > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 8:29 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/vmdq: Fix the core dump issue when > mem_pool is more than 34 > > Macro MAX_QUEUES was defined to 128, only allow 16 mem_pools in > theory. > When running vmdq_app with more than 34 mem_pools, > it will cause the core_dump issue. > Change MAX_QUEUES to 1024 will solve this issue. > > Signed-off-by: Xutao Sun <xutao.sun@intel.com> > --- > examples/vmdq/main.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/examples/vmdq/main.c b/examples/vmdq/main.c > index a142d49..b463cfb 100644 > --- a/examples/vmdq/main.c > +++ b/examples/vmdq/main.c > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ > #include <rte_mbuf.h> > #include <rte_memcpy.h> > > -#define MAX_QUEUES 128 > +#define MAX_QUEUES 1024 > /* > * For 10 GbE, 128 queues require roughly > * 128*512 (RX/TX_queue_nb * RX/TX_ring_descriptors_nb) per port. > -- > 1.9.3 Just for clarification, when you say mem_pools, do you mean vmdq pools? Also, if you are going to increase MAX_QUEUES, shouldn't you increase the NUM_MBUFS_PER_PORT? Looking at the comment below, looks like there is a calculation of number of mbufs based on number of queues. Plus, I assume 128 is the maximum number of queues per port, and as far as I know, only Fortville supports 256 as maximum. Thanks, Pablo
> -----Original Message----- > From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 3:59 PM > To: Sun, Xutao; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/vmdq: Fix the core dump issue > when mem_pool is more than 34 > > Hi Xutao, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Xutao Sun > > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 8:29 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/vmdq: Fix the core dump issue > > when mem_pool is more than 34 > > > > Macro MAX_QUEUES was defined to 128, only allow 16 mem_pools in > > theory. > > When running vmdq_app with more than 34 mem_pools, it will cause the > > core_dump issue. > > Change MAX_QUEUES to 1024 will solve this issue. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xutao Sun <xutao.sun@intel.com> > > --- > > examples/vmdq/main.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/examples/vmdq/main.c b/examples/vmdq/main.c index > > a142d49..b463cfb 100644 > > --- a/examples/vmdq/main.c > > +++ b/examples/vmdq/main.c > > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ > > #include <rte_mbuf.h> > > #include <rte_memcpy.h> > > > > -#define MAX_QUEUES 128 > > +#define MAX_QUEUES 1024 > > /* > > * For 10 GbE, 128 queues require roughly > > * 128*512 (RX/TX_queue_nb * RX/TX_ring_descriptors_nb) per port. > > -- > > 1.9.3 > > Just for clarification, when you say mem_pools, do you mean vmdq pools? > Also, if you are going to increase MAX_QUEUES, shouldn't you increase the > NUM_MBUFS_PER_PORT? > Looking at the comment below, looks like there is a calculation of number of > mbufs based on number of queues. > Plus, I assume 128 is the maximum number of queues per port, and as far as I > know, only Fortville supports 256 as maximum. > > Thanks, > Pablo Hi Pablo, I mean vmdq pools when I say mem_pools. And as you say, NUM_MBUFS_PER_PORT should be increased actually. I may use macro to replace the old expression. #define NUM_MBUFS_PER_PORT (MAX_QUEUES * max(RTE_TEST_RX_DESC_DEFAULT,RTE_TEST_TX_DESC_DEFAULT)) And this patch is to fix the issue about running VMDQ on Fortville, so the maximum number of queues is larger than 128. Thank you very much for your advice! Thanks, Xutao
diff --git a/examples/vmdq/main.c b/examples/vmdq/main.c index a142d49..b463cfb 100644 --- a/examples/vmdq/main.c +++ b/examples/vmdq/main.c @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ #include <rte_mbuf.h> #include <rte_memcpy.h> -#define MAX_QUEUES 128 +#define MAX_QUEUES 1024 /* * For 10 GbE, 128 queues require roughly * 128*512 (RX/TX_queue_nb * RX/TX_ring_descriptors_nb) per port.