Hi Everyone,
I sent this last week and haven’t heard back – apologize if I missed the
response but if not here it is again…
We use cryptodev in SPDK and included rte_cryptodev_pmd.h so that we may
release qpair memory that was allocated when we called
rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup(). We’d do
Hi Everyone,
We use cryptodev in SPDK and included rte_cryptodev_pmd.h so that we may
release qpair memory that was allocated when we called
rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup(). We’d do so by calling the function pointer
queue_pair_release() which I believe is the prescribed way to do this.
The
Hi All,
I'm having an issue with the following scenario with SPDK-based applications
built w/DPDK
using CryptoDev in a primary/secondary process setup.
Primary Process: An application that does crypto and properly initializes
aesni_mb
Secondary Process: An application that does not use crypto s
Hi All,
I'm having an issue with the following scenario with SPDK-based applications
built w/DPDK
using CryptoDev in a primary/secondary process setup.
Primary Process: An application that does crypto and properly initializes
aesni_mb
Secondary Process: An application that does not use crypto s
Great, thanks for the quick response!!
-Paul
From: Thomas Monjalon
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 2:30 AM
To: Luse, Paul E
Cc: dev@dpdk.org , olivier.m...@6wind.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Question about recent change to rte_mbuf struct - user
data and udata64 feels (breaks SPDK)
Hi
Hi,
Recently this patch
https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/commit/5284adad3e95025f9901869f581c8c04ea642d32
made the following change:
* mbuf: Removed the unioned fields ``userdata`` and ``udata64``
from the structure ``rte_mbuf``. It is replaced with dynamic fields.
Which breaks the SPDK project’
Thanks Jim!!
-from my iPhone
> On Jan 11, 2019, at 11:37 AM, Wiles, Keith wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 11, 2019, at 12:06 PM, Stephen Hemminger
>> wrote:
>>
>> If interface name is passed to remote or iface then check
>> the length and for invalid characters. This avoids problems where
>> name
Resend wrong subject
-Original Message-
From: Trahe, Fiona
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 7:43 AM
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; akhil.go...@nxp.com; Jozwiak, TomaszX
; shally.ve...@caviumnetworks.com;
ashish.gu...@caviumnetworks.com; Daly, Lee ; Luse, Paul E
; Trahe, Fiona
-Original Message-
From: Trahe, Fiona
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 7:43 AM
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; akhil.go...@nxp.com; Jozwiak, TomaszX
; shally.ve...@caviumnetworks.com;
ashish.gu...@caviumnetworks.com; Daly, Lee ; Luse, Paul E
; Trahe, Fiona
Subject: RE
Hi,
I have a test case where vdev_scan() is being called in a secondary process as
shown below in a snippet from the function. My test application is compiled
with AddressSanitizer which was complaining about a memory leak of memory
allocated in rte_mp_request_sync(). I added the free() call
Any thoughts on this?
-Original Message-
From: Luse, Paul E
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 5:43 PM
To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo ; 'Thomas Monjalon'
Cc: 'dev@dpdk.org' ; Doherty, Declan ;
Harris, James R ; Verkamp, Daniel
Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] Question on AESNI
64K) seems to not generate an error but also not encrypt
the data. Would be good to know if that's a real limitation or not, for not
I've worked around it in the calling code by breaking things up so that any
single crypto op is 32K or less.
Thanks
Paul
-Original Message-----
From:
That's what I'm
doing now, with a small hack to the function I mention below, and it seems to
be working good.
Thanks!
Pau
-Original Message-
From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 12:19 PM
To: Luse, Paul E ; Thomas Monjalon
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Doherty, Decla
Any thoughts on this?
Thanks,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net]
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2018 3:36 PM
To: Luse, Paul E
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; De Lara Guarch, Pablo ;
Doherty, Declan
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Question on AESNI PMD
Cc Declan and Pablo
Hi,
I'm working on an SPDK module that uses the DPDK cryptodev framework, initially
I'm using the AESNI PMD and have a few questions. in the doc it says that only
in-place is supported however I see code in set_mb_job_params() just after the
comment "Mutable crypto operation parameters" it appe
Hi,
I'm working on an SPDK module that uses the DPDK cryptodev framework, initially
I'm using the AESNI PMD and have a few questions. in the doc it says that only
in-place is supported however I see code in set_mb_job_params() just after the
comment "Mutable crypto operation parameters" it appe
16 matches
Mail list logo
