[dpdk-dev] Access to open flow table using DPDK libraries

2014-07-17 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
-Original Message- From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Shankari Vaidyalingam Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 9:15 AM To: dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Access to open flow table using DPDK libraries Hi, > > I would like to know is there a way for the application

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for AF_PACKET-based virtual devices

2014-07-16 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
2.6.32 is minimum, but I believe still needs patches to fix hugetlbfs issues. I think the first kernel which had all the features we need, and doesn't require patches, is 2.6.33.6. Jeff -Original Message- From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon Sent:

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for AF_PACKET-based virtual devices

2014-07-11 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Danny, can you specify multiple --vdev parameters? "--vdev=eth_packet0,iface=eth0 --vdev=eth_packet1,iface=eth1" -Original Message- From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zhou, Danny Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 1:27 PM To: John W. Linville Cc: dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re:

[dpdk-dev] Question on huge pages and running DPDK apps inside containers

2014-07-03 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Do you know if the host's hugepages are mapped into the container? Seeing as containers are meant to provide isolation, it seems to make sense that the host would not automatically share hugepages with a container, but I'm not sure. Jeff -Original Message- From: dev

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] Link Bonding Library

2014-05-28 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Hi Declan, I'm worried about one thing in "bond_ethdev_tx_broadcast()" related to freeing of the broadcasted packets. > +static uint16_t > +bond_ethdev_tx_broadcast(void *queue, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t > nb_pkts) > +{ > + struct bond_dev_private *internals; > + struct

[dpdk-dev] DPDK Latency Issue

2014-05-22 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Hello, > I measured a roundtrip latency (using Spirent traffic generator) of sending > 64B packets over a 10GbE to DPDK, and DPDK does nothing but simply forward > back to the incoming port (l3fwd without any lookup code, i.e., dstport = > port_id). > However, to my surprise, the average

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 05/11] mbuf: merge physaddr and buf_len in a bitfield

2014-05-09 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
I agree, we should wait for comments then test the performance when the patches have settled. -Original Message- From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 9:06 AM To: Shaw, Jeffrey B; dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 05/11] mbuf

[dpdk-dev] Using DPDK in a multiprocess environment

2014-04-08 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Have you tried calling "rte_eal_init()" closer to the beginning of the program in your secondary process (i.e. the first thing in main())? The same mmap address is required. The reason is simple, if process A thinks the virtual address of an mbuf is 123, and process B thinks the virtual

[dpdk-dev] 82599ES NIC support

2014-03-31 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of HS Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 11:16 AM To: Shaw, Jeffrey B Cc: dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 82599ES NIC support > Can you check if your PCI device ID is listed in "lib/librte_eal/common/ include/rte_pci_dev_ids.h"? 82599ES is not listed in

[dpdk-dev] condition for calling ixgbe_xmit_cleanup

2014-02-12 Thread Shaw, Jeffrey B
Hi Qing, The idea is that we do not want to clean the descriptor ring until we have used "enough" descriptors. So (nb_tx_desc -nb_tx_free) tells us how many descriptors we've used. Once we've used "enough" (i.e. tx_free_thresh) then we will try to clean the descriptor ring. If you look at the