[dpdk-dev] Segmentation fault in ixgbe_rxtx_vec.c:444 with 1.8.0

Martin Weiser martin.weiser at allegro-packets.com
Tue Jan 20 11:39:03 CET 2015


Hi again,

I did some further testing and it seems like this issue is linked to
jumbo frames. I think a similar issue has already been reported by
Prashant Upadhyaya with the subject 'Packet Rx issue with DPDK1.8'.
In our application we use the following rxmode port configuration:

.mq_mode    = ETH_MQ_RX_RSS,
.split_hdr_size = 0,
.header_split   = 0,
.hw_ip_checksum = 1,
.hw_vlan_filter = 0,
.jumbo_frame    = 1,
.hw_strip_crc   = 1,
.max_rx_pkt_len = 9000,

and the mbuf size is calculated like the following:

(2048 + sizeof(struct rte_mbuf) + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM)

This works fine with DPDK 1.7 and jumbo frames are split into buffer
chains and can be forwarded on another port without a problem.
With DPDK 1.8 and the default configuration (CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR
enabled) the application sometimes crashes like described in my first
mail and sometimes packet receiving stops with subsequently arriving
packets counted as rx errors. When CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR is
disabled the packet processing also comes to a halt as soon as jumbo
frames arrive with a the slightly different effect that now
rte_eth_tx_burst refuses to send any previously received packets.

Is there anything special to consider regarding jumbo frames when moving
from DPDK 1.7 to 1.8 that we might have missed?

Martin



On 19.01.15 11:26, Martin Weiser wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> we quite recently updated one of our applications to DPDK 1.8.0 and are
> now seeing a segmentation fault in ixgbe_rxtx_vec.c:444 after a few minutes.
> I just did some quick debugging and I only have a very limited
> understanding of the code in question but it seems that the 'continue'
> in line 445 without increasing 'buf_idx' might cause the problem. In one
> debugging session when the crash occurred the value of 'buf_idx' was 2
> and the value of 'pkt_idx' was 8965.
> Any help with this issue would be greatly appreciated. If you need any
> further information just let me know.
>
> Martin
>
>




More information about the dev mailing list