Date:   Fri, 27 May 2022 14:26:57 -0700
From:   Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Sven Anders <sven.anders@...uras.de>
CC:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "Tony Nguyen" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Bonding problem on Intel X710 hardware

On 5/17/2022 1:45 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> CC: intel

Thanks for the copy.


> 
> On Tue, 17 May 2022 16:23:16 +0200 Sven Anders wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> This is a follow up to my question. I did not hear anything so far, but I tried
>> to find some some information meanwhile.
>>
>> I've got a guess from somebody, that the error message "Error I40E_AQ_RC_EINVAL
>> adding RX filters on PF, promiscuous mode forced on" maybe triggered, because
>> I'm hitting a limit here.

Yes, typically this is a response from our firmware that a table is full 
in hardware, and I'm guessing that you might be running into a filter 
limit due to using vlans?

>>
>> Somebody other said, that this seems to be an error in the "bonding driver", but
>> I do not think so. Aside from that, there seem to be no special "bonding" mailing
>> list anymore. So I will have to ask this questions here anyway...

this netdev list is the bonding list since it's part of the networking 
stack in the kernel.

>>
>> I want to understand the problem to classify it.
>>
>> 1) Why is this "error" issued? Do I really hit a limit and what is this current limit?
>> 2) Is it really an error or is it more "a warning"?
>> 3) Why is this error triggered only when changing the "ntuples filter" and not during
>>      the normal adding of VLANs?
>>      Remark: I can trigger the "ntuples fiilter" later on again and it still works.
>>
>> I also tried the latest 5.18-rc kernel with the same problem.
>>
>> Maybe somebody will find time and try to reproduce this?
>> I will answer any questions...

We assigned someone to look into reproduction of this today, and they'll 
get back to you if we have further questions.


>>
>> Regards
>>    Sven
>>
>> Am 12.05.22 um 16:05 schrieb Sven Anders:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I'm having problems setting up a bond in adaptive load balancing
>>> mode (balance-alb, mode 6) on an intel X710 network adapter using
>>> the i40e driver connected to an Aruba 2530-48G switch.
>>> The network card has 4 on board ports.
>>> I'm using 2 ports for the bond with 36 VLANs on it.
>>>
>>> The setup is correct, because it works without problems, if
>>> I use the same setup with 1GBit Intel hardware (using the
>>> e1000e driver, version 3.2.6-k, firmware 5.10-2).
>>>
>>> Data packets are only received sporadically. If I run the same test
>>> with only one slave port, it works without problems.

And there are no counters going up in ethtool -S when you receive/drop 
packets?

>>>
>>> I debugged it down to the reception of the packets by the
>>> network hardware.
>>>
>>> If I remove the number of VLANs under 8, almost all packets are
>>> received. The fewer VLANs the better the receive rate.
>>>
>>> I suspected the hardware offloading operations to be the cause, so I
>>> tried to disable them. It resulted in the following:
>>>
>>>    If I turn of the "ntuple-filters" with
>>>      ethtool -K eth3 ntuple off
>>>      ethtool -K eth3 ntuple off
>>>    it will work.
>>>
>>>    But if I do this I see the following errors in "dmesg":
>>>     i40e 0000:65:00.1: Error I40E_AQ_RC_EINVAL adding RX filters on PF, promiscuous mode forced on
>>>     i40e 0000:65:00.2: Error I40E_AQ_RC_EINVAL adding RX filters on PF, promiscuous mode forced on
>>>
>>> Disabling any any other offloading operations made no change.
>>>
>>> For me it seems, that the hardware filter is dropping packets because they
>>> have the wrong values (mac-address ?).
>>> Turning the "ntuple-filters" off, forces the network adapter to accept
>>> all packets.
>>>
>>>
>>> My questions:
>>>
>>> 1. Can anybody explain or confirm this?
>>>
>>> 2. Is the a correct method to force the adapter in promiscous mode?
>>>
>>> 3. Are the any special settings needed, if I use ALB bonding, which I missed?
>>>
>>>
>>> Some details:
>>> -------------
>>>
>>> Linux kernel 5.15.35-core2 on x86_64.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the hardware:
>>> ---------------------
>>> 4 port Ethernet controller:
>>>    Intel Corporation Ethernet Controller X710 for 10GBASE-T (rev 02)
>>>    8086:15ff (rev 02)
>>>
>>> with
>>>
>>>    driver: i40e
>>>    version: 5.15.35-core2
>>>    firmware-version: 8.60 0x8000bd80 1.3140.0
>>>    bus-info: 0000:65:00.2
>>>    supports-statistics: yes
>>>    supports-test: yes
>>>    supports-eeprom-access: yes
>>>    supports-register-dump: yes
>>>    supports-priv-flags: yes
>>>
>>>
>>> This is current bonding configuration:
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Ethernet Channel Bonding Driver: v5.15.35-core2
>>>
>>> Bonding Mode: adaptive load balancing
>>> Primary Slave: None
>>> Currently Active Slave: eth3
>>> MII Status: up
>>> MII Polling Interval (ms): 100
>>> Up Delay (ms): 200
>>> Down Delay (ms): 200
>>> Peer Notification Delay (ms): 0
>>>
>>> Slave Interface: eth3
>>> MII Status: up
>>> Speed: 1000 Mbps
>>> Duplex: full
>>> Link Failure Count: 0
>>> Permanent HW addr: 68:05:ca:f8:9c:42
>>> Slave queue ID: 0
>>>
>>> Slave Interface: eth4
>>> MII Status: up
>>> Speed: 1000 Mbps
>>> Duplex: full
>>> Link Failure Count: 0
>>> Permanent HW addr: 68:05:ca:f8:9c:41
>>> Slave queue ID: 0
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>    Sven Anders
>>>    
>>
>>
>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen
>>    Sven Anders
>>
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists