Hi Olivier, Today I find a compile error, when I test ip fragment on dpdk.org. would you check this? thanks a lot. My dpdk.org commit: a6d71fa7146cc04320c2485d6dde44c1d888d652 The compile error as below: CC main.o /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c: In function 'init_mem': /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c:748:8: error: 'MBUF_DATA_SIZE' undeclared (first use in this function) 0, MBUF_DATA_SIZE, socket); ^ /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c:748:8: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
Best regards huilong -----Original Message----- From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zoltan Kiss Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 6:39 PM To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Olivier Matz; dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 00/13] mbuf: enhancements of mbuf clones Hi, On 22/04/15 12:59, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 10:57 AM >> To: dev at dpdk.org >> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; zoltan.kiss at linaro.org; Richardson, Bruce; >> nhorman at tuxdriver.com; olivier.matz at 6wind.com >> Subject: [PATCH v6 00/13] mbuf: enhancements of mbuf clones >> >> The first objective of this series is to fix the support of indirect >> mbufs when the application reserves a private area in mbufs. It also >> removes the limitation that rte_pktmbuf_clone() is only allowed on >> direct (non-cloned) mbufs. The series also contains some enhancements >> and fixes in the mbuf area that makes the implementation of the >> last patches easier. >> > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com> When does this series get merged? Regards, Zoltan