Actually, l3fwd works fine with fm10k vf. I don't know what's the exact reason of l3fwd-vf still in DPDK, at least we could make full support for vf in l3fwd instead of another sample with most code are the same compare with l3fwd.
Thanks, Michael On 2015/7/22 7:51, Zhang, Helin wrote: Marvin/Waterman Could you help to check if l3fwd is good enough for all cases (1g/10/40g, PF and VF, single queue/multiple queue)? We aim to remove l3fwd-vf to reduce an example application which is not so necessary. Thank you! Regards, Helin -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monja...@6wind.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:30 AM To: Zhang, Helin Cc: dev at dpdk.org<mailto:dev at dpdk.org>; Wu, Jingjing Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example 2015-07-14 14:50, Zhang, Helin: From: Wu, Jingjing Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf. Suggest to remove the l3fwd-vf example. Totally agree with this! But we need the confirmation from validation guys of that l3fwd works quite well on VF with all NICs (e.g. i350, 82599, x550, xl710, and fm10k). Helin, any new from validation?
