From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Charles (Chas) Williams" <3chas3@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Status of bnx2x pmd? Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:20:43 -0500 Message-ID: <1446661243.1777.2.camel@gmail.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: "Mussar, Gary" Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f180.google.com (mail-qk0-f180.google.com [209.85.220.180]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390298E91 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 19:20:46 +0100 (CET) Received: by qkct129 with SMTP id t129so23424742qkc.2 for ; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 10:20:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 18:10 -0400, Mussar, Gary wrote: > I have been attempting to build testpmd with the bnx2x pmd enabled to try and talk through a bcm57810 10G NIC card. I have tried using SR-IOV VFs and I have tried using the PFs. Neither seem to be able to be properly initialized in testpmd and/or testpmd aborts. > > Is this PMD actually usable or is it trash? > > Gary See the two patches I have posted to this list recently w/respect to the bnx2x. At this point, I have a VF on a 57810 working in the TX direction. I am unable to figure out what is wrong with the RX direction though. The rx packet counters increment but I don't seem to get packet delivery. There is probably a minor issue with bnx2x_fill_accept_flags() being used in both the PF and VF drivers when setting the rx filter but fixing that didn't seem to help. At this point it is a long slog comparing the linux driver to the PMD driver.