On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>
> Could you suggest another dp_packet_batch_XXX() name (which can be exposed
> to the end user) for the function that doesn't check the boundaries instead
> of 'add_unsafe', if you think it is not accurate?
How about
On 09.08.2017 17:19, Andy Zhou wrote:
>> Maybe I don't fully understand what you're trying to say, but I want to use
>> unsafe function in dpif-netdev for per-flow packet batching (see the patch)
>> and it should not be internal for that case.
>> (It's safe to use unsafe function there because
> Maybe I don't fully understand what you're trying to say, but I want to use
> unsafe function in dpif-netdev for per-flow packet batching (see the patch)
> and it should not be internal for that case.
> (It's safe to use unsafe function there because per-flow batches are
> guaranteed to be less
On 08.08.2017 21:36, Andy Zhou wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> On 07.08.2017 23:24, Andy Zhou wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Ilya Maximets
>>> wrote:
Almost all batch usecases covered by the new
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 07.08.2017 23:24, Andy Zhou wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>> Almost all batch usecases covered by the new API introduced
>>> in commit 72c84bc2db23
On 07.08.2017 23:24, Andy Zhou wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> Almost all batch usecases covered by the new API introduced
>> in commit 72c84bc2db23 ("dp-packet: Enhance packet batch APIs.")
>> except unsafe batch addition. It used in
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> Almost all batch usecases covered by the new API introduced
> in commit 72c84bc2db23 ("dp-packet: Enhance packet batch APIs.")
> except unsafe batch addition. It used in dpif-netdev for fast
> per-flow batches filling.