On 19 November 2015 at 16:43, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:46:52AM +0530, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote:
>> Assigns a packet pool to CoS using odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api.
>>
>
> This tests that you can assign a pool to a CoS but since it uses the
> same default_pool it doesn
Hi,
Pls find comments inline..
On 19 November 2015 at 16:24, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:46:51AM +0530, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote:
>> Adds support for configuring packet pool to a class-of-service.
>> linux-generic packet parser is enhanced to parse a packet directly
Thanks for pointing out.
Will update in the next version.
Regards,
Bala
On 17 November 2015 at 18:46, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> This should be marked API-NEXT.
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Balasubramanian Manoharan
> wrote:
>>
>> odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api is used to configure packet poo
Hi,
I went through the same issue as well..
In ODP we have defined that the dev-name is implementation specific
and hence I like the idea to add socket type to dev-name something
like "SOCKET_MMAP:eth0"/ "NETMAP: eth0" and this maps well with the
ODP definition for device name.
Regards,
Bala
On
Hi,
I went through the same issue as well..
In ODP we have defined that the dev-name is implementation specific
and hence I like the idea to add socket type to dev-name something
like "SOCKET_MMAP:eth0"/ "NETMAP: eth0" and this maps well with the
ODP definition for device name.
Regards,
Bala
On
inside classification.
Regards,
Bala
On 9 November 2015 at 16:02, Alexandru Badicioiu
wrote:
>
>
> On 9 November 2015 at 12:26, Bala Manoharan
> wrote:
>>
>> The existing Classification infra structure supports this behaviour of
>> hashing after classification we have
ion API.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> On 9 November 2015 at 11:11, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > -Original Message-
>>> > From: EXT Bala Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org]
>>> > Sen
Hi Petri,
Why don't we add this hash parameter to CoS so that when the packet
arrives to a CoS it can be distributed based on the hash algorithm to
a number of queues. Also if a system does not support Classification
this hashing can be attached to the default CoS and in systems
supporting Classif
This method of identifying ODP version using API is useful for finding
the implementation version while executing the binary. IMO we need to
additionally define a method to identify the version of the compiled
binary statically.
We can add a "#define Version " inside the
implementation file so tha
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 22 October 2015 at 18:11, wrote:
> From: Grigore Ion
>
> odph_ipv4_csum_update should be used to update the checksum inside a pkt,
> as it is used in all the other examples and tests different from
> classification. Thus the prototype of the function s
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 29 October 2015 at 16:38, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> Looks like merge to api-next, cherry-pick from api-next
> and merge master to api-next produced duplicate patch lines.
> Found that with inspecting branches with 'git diff master api-next'
>
> Signed-off-by
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 26 October 2015 at 16:09, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
> Fixes build issue on arch where uint32_t != unsigned:
> example/classifier/odp_classifier.c:694:8: error:
> passing argument 3 of ‘parse_value’ from incompatible
> pointer type [-Wer
.10.15 15:14, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>>
>> I skipped this coz this as I just realised that since this was an
>> error packet and it might not be required for platforms to parse an
>> error packet and hence I removed the sequence number check for this
>> packet and
I skipped this coz this as I just realised that since this was an
error packet and it might not be required for platforms to parse an
error packet and hence I removed the sequence number check for this
packet and just checked whether this packet was received on error CoS
queue.
Regards,
Bala
On 2
Hi Ivan,
Agreed. Splitting can be done.
Do you have any other comments apart from splitting?
Regards,
Bala
On 20 October 2015 at 15:52, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> Hi, Bala
>
> Propose to split this on 4 patches for clarity and history reason:
>
> 1 - destroy_inq() move in order to use as common f
Hi Ivan,
Comments inline.
On 15 October 2015 at 19:58, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
>
>
> On 15.10.15 16:39, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out the issues. Since this patch is merged I will
>> create a bug and add the missing po
Hi Ivan,
Thanks for pointing out the issues. Since this patch is merged I will
create a bug and add the missing points.
Pls provide your inputs on the comments.
On 15 October 2015 at 16:53, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> Hi, Bala
>
> Just compared this version with requirements for v2 and saw some mis
This patch needs to be merged after https://patches.linaro.org/54903/
Regards,
Bala
On 15 October 2015 at 11:45, Balasubramanian Manoharan
wrote:
> odp_pktio_param_init() API is used to initialize odp_pktio_param_t params
>
> Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
> ---
> test/validation/cla
Hi Bill,
Agreed. Maybe we can merge this patch and then I will send a separate
patch to resolve the conflict so that both your patch and the conflict
patch could be merged together.
IMO, if this patch is acceptable we can merge this as it is now and
then I can send a conflict resolution patch to b
an Manoharan
> wrote:
>>
>> Ping.
>>
>> On Thursday 01 October 2015 08:13 PM, Mike Holmes wrote:
>>
>> Thanks - I added a bug for each case
>>
>> On 1 October 2015 at 03:05, Bala Manoharan
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30 September
On 30 September 2015 at 21:34, Mike Holmes wrote:
>
>
> On 24 September 2015 at 10:43, Balasubramanian Manoharan
> wrote:
>>
>> Additional test suite is added to classification validation suite to test
>> individual PMRs. This suite will test the defined PMRs by configuring
>> pktio separately fo
Hi,
I am not sure whether we need this call for alloc multiple packets at once.
The reason being in a high speed data plane system the packets which
are allocated and not processed will result in holding up of pool
space which will result in dropping of the incoming packets if the
pool space is de
On 29 September 2015 at 13:48, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
> ---
> include/odp/api/packet.h | 11 +++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/odp/api/packet.h b/include/odp/api/packet.h
> index 5d46b7b..a73be01 100644
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 28 September 2015 at 20:22, Petri Savolainen
wrote:
> Packet input does not call packet_classifier function when
> there are no cos (pmr, default cos or l2/l3 table) set for
> the pktio interface.
>
> Signed-off-by: Petri Savolainen
> ---
> .../linux-g
For the series Reviewed-and-tested-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 23 September 2015 at 06:11, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer
> ---
> test/validation/classification/odp_classification_tests.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/test/
In this case the packet will not be dispatched to the default CoS in
the scenario when the application configures only the default CoS and
not the PMRs.
Is this the expected behaviour? in case not then
pktio_cls_enabled_set() should be configured in the
odp_pktio_default_cos_set() function also.
This method of using pcap file to generate packets is fine.
But why should we use a dedicated interface with "pcap" as the name?
I was imagining something like an ODP application which reads from a
given pcap file constructs the packet and sends the packet through an
interface.
The concern I have
Ping.
On 25 August 2015 at 19:45, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> No more comments, reviews?
>
> Maxim.
>
> On 08/11/15 15:10, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote:
>>
>> Changes in v2: Adds bug link in the patch description
>>
>> 1. This patch series renames the classification APIs for ODP consistency
>> odp_c
Hi,
I have added the following comment on this patch 2/4 regarding the
naming for this patch. Other than this I am fine with this patch.
Regards,
Bala
-- Forwarded message --
From: Balasubramanian Manoharan
Date: 20 August 2015 at 17:48
Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv3 2/
On 26 August 2015 at 16:27, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext
> Bill Fischofer
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:26 AM
> To: LNG ODP Mailman List
> Subject: [lng-odp] [ARCH] Order Resolution APIs
>
>
>
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 27 August 2015 at 13:27, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Petri Savolainen
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of
>> ext Zoltan Kiss
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26
Hi,
On 25 August 2015 at 16:09, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of
>> ext Bala Manoharan
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:14 PM
>> To: Zol
Hi Zoltan,
Few comments inline...
On 24 August 2015 at 22:18, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>
> Applications can read the computed hash (if any) and set it if they want
> to store any extra information in it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss
> ---
>
> v2:
> - focus on RSS hash only
> - use setter/getter's
>
Hi,
On 20 August 2015 at 17:32, Bill Fischofer
wrote:
> The RSS is relevant to packets originating from a NIC and is independent
> of the CoS or other flow designators. It's there mainly because some
> applications (e.g., OVS) use it internally, so it's for legacy support.
>
This API might be
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 15 August 2015 at 00:25, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> Applications can preset certain parts of the packet user area, so when that
> memory will be allocated it starts from a known state. If the platform
> allocates the memory during pool creation, it's enough t
Hi Ivan,
On 19 August 2015 at 15:02, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Hi Bala,
>
> just several comments I forgot to mention.
>
> On 19.08.15 08:45, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> On 18 August 2015 at 22:39, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz.
Ivan,
On 18 August 2015 at 22:39, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> post test review.
>
> I've tested. It works for me. (except UDP/TCP src, as it's not supported).
> Why you didn't add here others PMR? Are you planing it after?
> Also there is no some "inter-PMR" tests, like:
> 1 - create PMR_dudp-CoS1
Ivan,
On 18 August 2015 at 21:43, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 18.08.15 18:54, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> On 18 August 2015 at 21:15, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> B
Ivan,
On 18 August 2015 at 21:15, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 18.08.15 18:16, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> On 18 August 2015 at 19:22, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Bala
Hi Ivan,
On 18 August 2015 at 19:22, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Hi, Bala
>
> Note: Your patch is based on API-NEXT and it obliged me to do some
> modifications
> with odp_pktio_param_t before testing. Also I'm still not sure about using
> odp_pmr_terms_cap(), but maybe it's OK to simply fail.
>
>
Ping.
On 14 August 2015 at 22:00, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
>
> On 14.08.15 19:29, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> I am planning to add MAC support in a separate patch.
>> I believe MAC should be easier to get-in si
Hi Ivan,
I am planning to add MAC support in a separate patch.
I believe MAC should be easier to get-in since it has been agreed.
Regards,
Bala
On 14 August 2015 at 21:57, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Hi, Bala
>
> Just checked if you added real MAC and seems you forgot to.
> Or maybe you are plani
I agree with Bill. retval should be tested for success in this case.
Regards,
Bala
On 14 August 2015 at 01:24, Bill Fischofer
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Mike Holmes
> wrote:
>
>> retval is not used, remove it
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes
>> ---
>> test/validation/class
the first segment. This is just an implementation detail and
we can leave this topic since I believe we are both on the same page.
Regards,
Bala
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Bala Manoharan > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12 August 2015 at 18:34, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
&g
On 12 August 2015 at 18:34, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> On 12/08/15 11:55, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12 August 2015 at 16:17, Bala Manoharan
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12 August 2015 at 15:37, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>>
>>>
>&g
only during pool create then application will have to reset
the user-area before calling odp_packet_free() API.
Regards,
Bala
>
> I've added an agenda item for this to today's ARCH call.
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Bala Manoharan > wrote:
>
>>
>>
On 12 August 2015 at 16:17, Bala Manoharan
wrote:
>
>
> On 12 August 2015 at 15:37, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12/08/15 07:34, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Comments inline...
>>>
>>>
On 12 August 2015 at 15:37, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>
>
> On 12/08/15 07:34, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Comments inline...
>>
>> On 12 August 2015 at 00:01, Zoltan Kiss > <mailto:zoltan.k...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Ap
Hi,
Comments inline...
On 12 August 2015 at 00:01, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> Applications can preset certain parts of the buffer or user area, so when
> that
> memory will be allocated it starts from a known state. If the platform
> allocates the memory during pool creation, it's enough to run the
>
Hi,
Comments inline...
On 7 August 2015 at 17:17, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer
> ---
> include/odp/api/schedule.h | 81
> --
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/odp/api/schedule.h b/i
Hi,
On 5 August 2015 at 04:11, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer
> ---
> include/odp/api/schedule.h | 38 --
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/odp/api/schedule.h b/include/odp/api/schedule.h
> in
On 3 August 2015 at 23:31, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 03.08.15 20:49, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> On 3 August 2015 at 22:58, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Bala,
>>
>&g
Ivan,
On 3 August 2015 at 22:58, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 03.08.15 20:16, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> On 3 August 2015 at 22:33, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> B
Ivan,
On 3 August 2015 at 22:33, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 03.08.15 19:51, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3 August 2015 at 22:16, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Bala,
>>
>
On 3 August 2015 at 22:16, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> ...
>
>
>>
>> what in case of TCP? Incorrect seq num?
>>
>> Looks like a coding error. TCP should be added using a boolean
>> flag.
>>
>> Incorrect seq num is tested in the ASSERT function after
>>
On 3 August 2015 at 22:01, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
>
>
> On 03.08.15 19:24, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3 August 2015 at 21:44, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>> One more issue
>&g
On 3 August 2015 at 21:44, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> One more issue
>
> On 30.07.15 18:20, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Additional test suite is added to classification validation suite to test
>> individual PMRs. This suite will test the defined PMRs by configuring
>> pktio separately fo
On 3 August 2015 at 21:23, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> As a proposition, we had talk some time ago about,
> You moved packet creation to common classification file.
> Maybe it's time to assign correct src/dst MAC address, taken from pktio?
> In separate patch.
Yes. I agree we need to correct them.
Hi,
On 3 August 2015 at 17:52, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
>
> Hi, Bala
>
> On 30.07.15 18:20, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Additional test suite is added to classification validation suite to test
>> individual PMRs. This suite will test the defined PMRs by configuring
>> pktio separately f
Hi Christophe,
Thanks for pointing this out :) I had started this work before the naming
conventions were mandated.
I will follow the naming conventions followed here before my final patch is
out.
I will update these changes along with review comments I get ;)
Regards,
Bala
On 31 July 2015 at 2
On 31 July 2015 at 20:03, Bill Fischofer wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Bala Manoharan > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 31 July 2015 at 17:48, Bill Fischofer
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:3
On 31 July 2015 at 17:48, Bill Fischofer wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Bala Manoharan > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Comments inline...
>>
>> On 31 July 2015 at 08:11, Bill Fischofer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Signed-of
Hi,
Comments inline...
On 31 July 2015 at 08:11, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer
> ---
> include/odp/api/schedule.h | 38 --
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/odp/api/schedule.h b/include/odp/
)
> val = odph_counter_read_global(_arg->thread_tbl, _arg->num,
> sa_db_entry->packets);
>..
> }
>
> Hope this helps,
> Alex
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 30 July 201
Hi,
Maybe we need additional API for initialising the counter to reset it to
zero and also a need for decrementing the counter?
IMO, we need to properly document the use-case of these counter API
functions since these counters are thread-specific what will the different
between using these APIs a
Agreed. Please raise a BUG against me on this topic and I will send a patch
to change them.
Regards,
Bala
On 24 July 2015 at 17:38, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> For consistency with ODP naming conventions there should be a standard
> getter/setter for this information that have the following signatu
On 24 July 2015 at 14:44, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
>
>
> On 07/24/2015 11:10 AM, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 23 July 2015 at 12:09, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <
> nmo...@kalray.eu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 07/23/2015 07:43 AM, Bala Ma
On 23 July 2015 at 12:09, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
>
>
> On 07/23/2015 07:43 AM, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 21 July 2015 at 13:05, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <
> nmo...@kalray.eu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 07/20/2015 07:24 PM, Bala Ma
On 21 July 2015 at 13:05, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
>
>
> On 07/20/2015 07:24 PM, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Few comments inline
>
> On 20 July 2015 at 22:38, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <
> nmo...@kalray.eu> wrote:
>
>> Replace
AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <
> nmo...@kalray.eu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 07/20/2015 07:24 PM, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Few comments inline
>>
>> On 20 July 2015 at 22:38, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <
>> nmo.
a future new API's, as you said before.
>
> Regards,
>
> Genís Riera Pérez.
>
> Genís Riera Pérez
> Software Engineer at StarFlow Networks
> Edifici K2M, S103 c/ Jordi Girona 31
> 08034 Barcelona
>
> E-mail: gri...@starflownetworks.com
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2
Hi,
Few comments inline
On 20 July 2015 at 22:38, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
> Replace current segmentation with an explicit define.
> This mainly means two things:
> - All code can now test and check the max segmentation which will prove
>useful for tests and open the way for many
era Pérez.
>
> Genís Riera Pérez
> Software Engineer at StarFlow Networks
> Edifici K2M, S103 c/ Jordi Girona 31
> 08034 Barcelona
>
> E-mail: gri...@starflownetworks.com
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Bala Manoharan > wrote:
>
>> Hi Genis,
>>
>>
Hi Genis,
I would like you to validate whether the options of adding headroom per CoS
work for you.
IMO, adding headroom per CoS makes more sense since CoS defines a specific
flow and the application might be interested to modify headroom per flow.
Since with your current proposal the same is pos
On 17 July 2015 at 20:56, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 07:43:08PM +0530, Bala Manoharan wrote:
> > Hi Stuart,
> >
> > Pls raise a bug for POOL_DROP implementation. I will implement drop
> policy.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bala
> >
>
Hi Stuart,
Pls raise a bug for POOL_DROP implementation. I will implement drop policy.
Regards,
Bala
On 17 July 2015 at 19:40, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> odp_cos_set_drop() should certainly be implemented. If it's not that
> should be reported as a bug against both the classifier and the test sui
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 14 July 2015 at 17:28, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam
> ---
> platform/linux-generic/include/odp_classification_inlines.h | 13
> -
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/platform/linux-gene
On 15 July 2015 at 14:49, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Bala,
>
> On 15.07.15 11:31, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> Comments Inline...
>>
>> On 15 July 2015 at 02:48, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
P.S: May be the patch description needs to change
On 14 July 2015 at 18:36, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> I suppose, the intention was to check only ODP_PMR_IPPROTO capability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk
> ---
> test/validation/classification/odp_cla
Hi Ivan,
Comments Inline...
On 15 July 2015 at 02:48, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> It's simple improvement is intended to open eyes on possible
> hidden issues when a packet can be lost (or sent to def CoS)
> while matching one of the rules of first PMR match set, but
> intendent to second PMR matc
On 7 July 2015 at 18:34, Benoît Ganne wrote:
> In this case of ABS_OFFSET_L2 failure during creation is better
as the application can better handle the code for different
implementations supporting different number of OFFSET term values
rather than failing in the context in which c
On 3 July 2015 at 21:22, Benoît Ganne wrote:
> Hi Bala,
>
> This signature should work fine. Can we additionally add the pktio
interface information also to this API so that the
implementation could
fail during creation itself if more than the supported numbers get
attached t
On 2 July 2015 at 21:17, Benoît Ganne wrote:
> Hi Bala,
>
> I'd define it like this,
>>> odp_pmr_t odp_pmr_create_custom(uint32_t offset, const void *val,
>>> const void *mask, uint32_t val_sz);
>>>
>>> It would fail if the requested custom rule is not supported or too
>>> many custom rules are
On 2 July 2015 at 19:03, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext
> > Benoît Ganne
> > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 9:53 PM
> > To: lng-odp@lists.linaro
Hi Ben,
Pls find my comments inline.
On 2 July 2015 at 18:48, Benoît Ganne wrote:
> Hi Bala,
>
> Thanks for your feedback. My comments inline.
>
> 1. The term ODP_PMR_OFFSET_ABS could be renamed as ODP_PMR_OFFSET_L2 as
>> this offset is from L2.
>> This would help some platforms which can supp
Hi,
I have a few concerns with this API proposal,
1. The term ODP_PMR_OFFSET_ABS could be renamed as ODP_PMR_OFFSET_L2 as
this offset is from L2.
This would help some platforms which can support additional offset from
custom layer other than L2 and they can add additional Enum in their
private he
ation.
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Stuart Haslam
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:00:07PM +0530, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>> > If the idea of this patch is to test segmented packets it can be
>> > accomplished by allocating packets of s
If the idea of this patch is to test segmented packets it can be
accomplished by allocating packets of size greater than "seg_len" in an
additional test case rather than modifying the segment length in pool
create function.
Regards,
Bala
On 30 June 2015 at 22:26, Stuart Haslam wrote:
> On Tue,
On 25 June 2015 at 02:48, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
>
>
> On 24.06.15 19:57, Bala Manoharan wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> Pls see my comments inline.
>>
>> On 24 June 2015 at 09:13, Ivan Khoronzhuk > <mailto:ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org>> wrote:
>
Hi Ivan,
Pls see my comments inline.
On 24 June 2015 at 09:13, Ivan Khoronzhuk
wrote:
> Guys, sorry I didn't ask the following questions during the ODP meeting.
> I had an issue with my microphone and it seems the call was ended quickly.
> But I need to ask. Maybe it's better, it requires some
From: Balasubramanian Manoharan
This is a UDP source port based loopback application which creates
multiple packet output queues for given UDP port numbers and attaches
them to the given pktio interface. The default packet are enqueued into the
lowest priority value.
The packets are enqueued int
We need the fix for IP address also in the same function as the src and dst
ip address are also kept as zero.
Regards,
Bala
On 10 June 2015 at 20:55, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> I always fix that for debugging :)
>
> Maxim.
>
> On 06/10/15 18:00, Stuart Haslam wrote:
>
>> The test generates UDP packe
ide a
> filter, plus apply an OR operation between the different filters I specify
> to the application. Am I right?
>
> Hope I clarify the problem I try to solve with ODP.
>
> Regards,
>
> Genís Riera Pérez
>
> E-mail: genis.riera.pe...@gmail.com
>
> 2015-06-10
Hi,
There is a possibility in classification configuration to attach multiple
PMR rules at the pktio level.
I believe the above example you have described could be solved using the
following rules
pmr1 = odp_pmr_create(rule1);
pmr2 = odp_pmr_create(rule2);
odp_pktio_pmr_match_set_cos(pmr1, src_p
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 10 June 2015 at 17:36, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
> ---
> example/classifier/odp_classifier.c | 6 --
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/example/classifier/odp_clas
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan
On 2 June 2015 at 20:16, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> packet i/o test can create 2 types of queues: scheduled and
> polled. Do not do dequeue from scheduled queue.
> https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1383
>
> Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov
> ---
> test/valid
From: Balasubramanian Manoharan
This is a vlan priority based L2 loopback application which creates
multiple packet output queues for each vlan priority value and attaches
them to the given pktio interface.
The packets are enqueued into different packet output queues based on
their vlan priority
From: Balasubramanian Manoharan
This is linux-generic implementation of egress classification.
This is a lock-less implementation for output packet scheduling, shaping
and rate limitting.
Multiple packet output queues with different priority values can be created
and attached with pktio interfac
] [PATCH 1/3] example: classifier: remove extra local init
To: ext Bala Manoharan
Cc: LNG ODP Mailman List
I noticed the same and will add that documentation.
-Petri
From: ext Bala Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 3:49 PM
To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia
Yes. I am also searching this patch in the repo.
Looks like the patch from Petri has been missed.
Regards,
Bala
On 28 May 2015 at 18:31, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
> I send a patch that corrected this, but not sure what happened to it.
>
>
>
> -Petri
>
>
>
> From: lng-odp [mailt
301 - 400 of 528 matches
Mail list logo
