<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Adam,<br>
<br>
I have no good ideas on the problem with LLDP packets. I've tried
various things in attempt to repeat the problem without any luck.
Since these packet come from Peer/Tester (based on source MAC
information), I think it would make sense to check ethtool priv
flags while tests run running to see FW LLDP status. May be it is
enabled and testing do not notice it (theoretically configuration
is synced and checked to match after each test, so it should not
be a problem). I think it would be useful to double-check on all
interfaces of the NIC.<br>
<br>
Do you have any progress with run on ARM DUTs? Does it work?<br>
<br>
Please, let me know if you need any help and if something is
blocking it to be moved forward and used on regular basis.<br>
<br>
Andrew. <br>
<br>
On 11/20/23 20:18, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:276e8fb3-b185-4434-aca5-4629c5ff8ad1@oktetlabs.ru">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Adam,<br>
<br>
On 11/16/23 23:03, Adam Hassick wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAC-YWqjqOoRc51ksTGh3+yYHGYfBQWSmrs4E-ES4etDVKS3jyg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Andrew,<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">If
you use copy of dpdk-ethdev-ts has
398e272495143884274f5a53c6fe0cc16df41052, you don't need to
pass --trc-tag=<span>pci-8086-1572 any more since
corresponding changeset updates expectations to have the
same for </span><span>pci-8086-1583.</span></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'll try this for the next run.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Sorry,
but I've failed to find what's wrong there.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That if statement works if using the traditional
single-bracket conditional, or it needs to be rewritten as
"[[ -z "${test_log}" ]] || [[ ! -r "${test_log}" ]]". The
latter is the change I made, but both work.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks a lot. Hopefully fixed.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAC-YWqjqOoRc51ksTGh3+yYHGYfBQWSmrs4E-ES4etDVKS3jyg@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">As
far as I can see LLDP packets spoil testing results:<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362760&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_63"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362760&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_63</a><br>
<br>
As far as I can see main prologue disables FW LLDP on
Tester<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362400&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_80"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362400&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_80</a><br>
but I guess it could be still enabled on DUT side and
DPDK do not provide means to disable it as far as I
know. I vaguely remember that Intel provides FW
configuration tools which can do it.<br>
It is interesting since DPDK gets unexpected LLDP
packets but may be packets sent by FW go via loopback
and visible to PF as well.<br>
Other possible source of LLDP packet is a switch if NICs
are connected via switch. If so, LLDP should be disabled
on corresponding switch ports.<br>
<br>
As far as I can see fixing the problem should make
results much closer. However, I already see some
differences in behaviour which should be simply fixed in
TRC. For example, X710 gets 9 packets less than
configuration number of Rx descriptors, but XL710 gets
10 packets less.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have the "disable-fw-lldp" private flag set on both
of the XL710 ports on the DUT machine. Very strange how
there are still LLDP packets appearing in there.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Me too. Corresponding packet has source MAC from Peer/Tester
machine NIC.<br>
It is really strange since prologue disabled LLDP there as well.
I'll try to play with it locally more, but have no good ideas in
fact.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAC-YWqjqOoRc51ksTGh3+yYHGYfBQWSmrs4E-ES4etDVKS3jyg@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>These systems are not connected to any switch, so
maybe a service on the DUT itself is sending them. I'm
not sure how that could be happening though, because I
don't have the LLDP daemon installed on either system.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Also
I see that performance tests are not run because of
failed prologue:<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=369564&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=369564&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true</a><br>
I'll investigate it, but I guess the source of
difference is that we always run tests on single
interface. Just add -p0 (--cfg=<span>iol-dts-xl710-p0</span>)
to your configuration name. You don't need to change
ts-rigs for it since the suffix is handled by generic
code. It simply comments the second instance and
forces take the first interface only into account.
Initially it was introduced to run independent tests
on different ports to be able to share configuration,
but I guess right now it has limitations for some
packages like representors which require entire NIC.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I can try that and will see if it works. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This problem is fixed in fresh TE and dpdk-ethdev-ts published on
GitHub.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Andrew.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAC-YWqjqOoRc51ksTGh3+yYHGYfBQWSmrs4E-ES4etDVKS3jyg@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,<br>
</div>
<div>Adam<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at
2:20 AM Andrew Rybchenko <<a
href="mailto:andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>Hi Adam,<br>
<br>
On 11/7/23 23:30, Adam Hassick wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi Andrew,<br>
<br>
</div>
The runner machine was missing a dependency
for one of the scripts, "pixz". After
installing that, it appears to have worked. I
can see the results listed on the ts-factory
Bublik instance.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
If you use copy of dpdk-ethdev-ts has
398e272495143884274f5a53c6fe0cc16df41052, you don't need
to pass --trc-tag=<span>pci-8086-1572 any more since
corresponding changeset updates expectations to have the
same for </span><span>pci-8086-1583.</span><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>In the latest revision of ts-rigs, there
appears to be a syntax error at line 42 within
the script located at
"ts-rigs/scripts/publish_logs/prj/ts-factory/publish",
within the if condition. I fixed it locally to
get it to run.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Sorry, but I've failed to find what's wrong there.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Taking a quick look at a comparison against
your most recent X710 run, it looks like we're NOK
on around ~400 more test cases. By percentage of
tests, we're 1% off, however, it looks like whole
subsets of the test suite that contain low numbers
of tests are failing. I wonder if this is due to
differences between the Intel X710 and XL710 or
issues in our dev testbed.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
As far as I can see LLDP packets spoil testing results:<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362760&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_63"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362760&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_63</a><br>
<br>
As far as I can see main prologue disables FW LLDP on
Tester<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362400&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_80"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=362400&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true&lineNumber=1_80</a><br>
but I guess it could be still enabled on DUT side and DPDK
do not provide means to disable it as far as I know. I
vaguely remember that Intel provides FW configuration
tools which can do it.<br>
It is interesting since DPDK gets unexpected LLDP packets
but may be packets sent by FW go via loopback and visible
to PF as well.<br>
Other possible source of LLDP packet is a switch if NICs
are connected via switch. If so, LLDP should be disabled
on corresponding switch ports.<br>
<br>
As far as I can see fixing the problem should make results
much closer. However, I already see some differences in
behaviour which should be simply fixed in TRC. For
example, X710 gets 9 packets less than configuration
number of Rx descriptors, but XL710 gets 10 packets less.<br>
<br>
Also I see that performance tests are not run because of
failed prologue:<br>
<a
href="https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=369564&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ts-factory.io/bublik/v2/log/362398?focusId=369564&mode=treeAndinfoAndlog&experimental=true</a><br>
I'll investigate it, but I guess the source of difference
is that we always run tests on single interface. Just add
-p0 (--cfg=<span>iol-dts-xl710-p0</span>) to your
configuration name. You don't need to change ts-rigs for
it since the suffix is handled by generic code. It simply
comments the second instance and forces take the first
interface only into account. Initially it was introduced
to run independent tests on different ports to be able to
share configuration, but I guess right now it has
limitations for some packages like representors which
require entire NIC.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Andrew.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Thanks,<br>
</div>
<div>Adam</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
(dropped history, to keep mail size small) </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>