[libvirt] two hostdev devices problem
Dominik Mostowiec
dominikmostowiec at gmail.com
Fri May 24 13:16:31 UTC 2013
Hi,
>> Do you have this problem with mac addresses when max_vfs is set to an
even lower number?
No,
When max_fs=10, macs in VM are OK.
Phisical interfaces:
> ifconfig eth0
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr b8:ca:3a:5b:a6:38
UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> ifconfig eth1
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr b8:ca:3a:5b:a6:38
UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
>> Hmm. ixgbe. I just got a report yesterday that setting of the vlan tag
>> for ixgbe vfs was not working properly (although it works fine for igb
>> devices)
Domain config:
<interface type="network">
<alias name="hostdev0"/>
<source network="vnet0"/>
<mac address="52:54:0a:b1:48:fc"/>
</interface>
<interface type="network">
<alias name="hostdev1"/>
<source network="vnet1"/>
<mac address="52:54:0a:b1:48:fc"/>
</interface>
Networks defined:
<network>
<name>vnet0</name>
<uuid>ec49896a-a0b5-4944-a81f-9f0cdf578871</uuid>
<forward mode='hostdev' managed='yes'>
<pf dev='eth0'/>
</forward>
</network>
<network>
<name>vnet1</name>
<uuid>6c8319e8-8b53-4382-9f4e-2400819b00a9</uuid>
<forward mode='hostdev' managed='yes'>
<pf dev='eth1'/>
</forward>
</network>
Regards
Dominik
2013/5/24 Laine Stump <laine at laine.org>:
> On 05/24/2013 04:45 AM, Dominik Mostowiec wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have libnl3, kernel 3.8.8, os ubuntu 12.04, net:intel10G.
>> Upgrade libnl to 3.2.16 not helps,
>>
>> I don't know - this is probably another problem, when I have set
>> max_vfs=35,35 VF is attaching to VM but mac in VM is not set
>> propertly.
>
> Do you have this problem with mac addresses when max_vfs is set to an
> even lower number?
>
> Ah, another thing - did you "ifconfig up" the PF before you started the
> guest?
>> Libvirt probably set this macs because in syslog:
>> May 23 14:48:59 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12574.171792] ixgbe
>
>
> Hmm. ixgbe. I just got a report yesterday that setting of the vlan tag
> for ixgbe vfs was not working properly (although it works fine for igb
> devices)
>
>
>> 0000:01:00.0: setting MAC 52:54:0a:b1:48:f7 on VF 0
>> May 23 14:48:59 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12574.171799] ixgbe
>> 0000:01:00.0: Reload the VF driver to make this change effective.
>> May 23 14:48:59 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12574.175054] ixgbe
>> 0000:01:00.1: setting MAC 52:54:0a:b1:48:f7 on VF 0
>> May 23 14:48:59 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12574.175060] ixgbe
>> 0000:01:00.1: Reload the VF driver to make this change effective.
>> May 23 14:48:59 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12574.307172] pci-stub
>> 0000:01:12.4: enabling device (0000 -> 0002)
>> May 23 14:49:00 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12575.662890] assign device 0:1:12.4
>> May 23 14:49:00 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12575.665210] pci-stub
>> 0000:01:12.5: enabling device (0000 -> 0002)
>> May 23 14:49:00 on-10-177-32-62 kernel: [12575.765609] assign device 0:1:12.5
>> But in VM i have another macs probably old from VF.
>>
>> ---
>> Regards
>> Dominik
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/5/24 Laine Stump <laine at laine.org>:
>>> On 05/22/2013 06:32 PM, Dominik Mostowiec wrote:
>>>> I tested on 1.0.5 patched version and vm with 2 vfs working fine.
>>>>
>>>> I have another problem
>>>> When i set max_vfs=63:
>>>> internal error missing IFLA_VF_INFO in netlink response
>>>>
>>>> Its working when max_vfs=31
>>>>
>>> What is the platform, kernel version, and what version of libnl are you
>>> using (libnl 1 or libnl3?)
>>>
>>> There have been multiple bugs recently filed and fixed in this area on
>>> RHEL6/CentOS6. In particular, there was a problem with max_vfs > 50 that
>>> had exactly this symptom. It was solved by a patch to libnl-1.1. If your
>>> platform uses libnl-1.1, this could be the source of the problem. It is
>>> fixed in the upstream libnl-1.1.4 maintenance release.
>>>
>>> I unfortunately am not sure where the libnl-1.1 git is (I only have the
>>> git tree for libnl3), so I can't give you the exact commit message, but
>>> in short the problem was that libnl was using too small of a buffer for
>>> the netlink socket, so when there were a lot of vfs, the netlink message
>>> containing vf info was truncated.
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dominik
>>>>
>>>> 21 maj 2013 15:19, "Dominik Mostowiec" <dominikmostowiec at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:dominikmostowiec at gmail.com>> napisał(a):
>>>>
>>>> Hmm,
>>>> It seems to be working (after only simple tests).
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dominik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/5/21 Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com <mailto:jtomko at redhat.com>>
>>>>
>>>> On 05/21/2013 01:37 PM, Laine Stump wrote:
>>>> > On 05/21/2013 04:03 AM, Ján Tomko wrote:
>>>> >> On 05/21/2013 09:32 AM, Dominik Mostowiec wrote:
>>>> >>> hi,
>>>> >>> I try to add 2 VF by "hostdev".
>>>> >>> Networks (vnet0, vnet1) with:
>>>> >>> <forward mode='hostdev' managed='yes'>
>>>> >>> <pf dev='eth1'/>
>>>> >>> .....
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Domain:
>>>> >>> <interface type="network">
>>>> >>> <source network="vnet0"/>
>>>> >>> ....
>>>> >>> <interface type="network">
>>>> >>> <source network="vnet1"/>
>>>> >>> ....
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> virsh create error:
>>>> >>> "error: internal error process exited while connecting to
>>>> monitor: kvm:
>>>> >>> -device
>>>> pci-assign,configfd=25,host=01:10.1,id=hostdev0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x4:
>>>> >>> Duplicate ID 'hostdev0' for device"
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> Hi,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> it seems we have been assigning the same id to all network
>>>> hostdevs until this
>>>> >> recent commit (not yet released):
>>>> >>
>>>> >> http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commitdiff;h=6597cc25
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > If that patch has such an effect, it's purely accidental.
>>>> Have you
>>>> > tested this? (I plan to test a before and after as soon as
>>>> I've had
>>>> > breakfast)
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I haven't tested it and looking at the code again, I might've
>>>> been wrong :(
>>>>
>>>> Sorry about that.
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pozdrawiam
>>>> Dominik
>>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Pozdrawiam
Dominik
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list