lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRE: VFs go missing with latest kernel
    Date
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Rose, Gregory V
    > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:03 PM
    > To: David Ahern
    > Cc: LKML
    > Subject: RE: VFs go missing with latest kernel
    >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: David Ahern [mailto:daahern@cisco.com]
    > > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:50 PM
    > > To: Rose, Gregory V
    > > Cc: LKML
    > > Subject: Re: VFs go missing with latest kernel
    > >
    > > On 01/31/2012 05:43 PM, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >> Back to the missing VF problem: reverting the patch I mentioned
    > before
    > > >> and my VM boots up fine with the even-numbered VFs assigned to it.
    > > >
    > > > OK, thanks... I was staring at the dmesg output you sent me and it is
    > > odd because the even numbered VFs that go missing are there when you set
    > > their MAC addresses. See output below the dotted line after my reply.
    > >
    > > Ah, I think I confused you. The VFs for the first 2 ports (ie., the
    > > first 14 VFs) are seen fine; I only showed the VFs for the second 2
    > > ports -- which are missing the even number.
    > >
    > > So, in summary I am missing 7 VFs all associated with the even numbers
    > > on the last ports of a quad port card.
    >
    > OK, thanks for the clarification. But it still shows that all 28 VFs
    > exist while their MAC addresses are being set but then at some point
    > subsequent to that 7 of them on the port belonging to PCI device 07:00.0
    > disappear for some reason.
    >
    > I'll see what I can find.

    I found this in the log file you sent me. I had missed it yesterday.

    [ 15.835223] igb 0000:07:00.0: 7 pre-allocated VFs found - override max_vfs setting of 7
    [ 15.835393] igb 0000:07:00.0: 7 VFs allocated

    I think that must be a bug in the code that searches for VFs already allocated and is the source of your problem. I'll keep you updated on what I find but it has to be a bug in the VF device lookups.

    - Greg



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-01 18:49    [W:0.027 / U:0.172 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site