t; Hi everyone,
>
> First of all thanks Owen for stepping forward with this RFC.
> Few thoughts on this subject below.
> Konstantin
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 12:59 PM
> > To: Ananyev, Konsta
] [RFC] Testpmd RPC API
>
>
>
> From: Owen Hilyard
> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2022 1:47 PM
> To: Jerin Jacob
> Cc: dpdk-dev ; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> ; Thomas Monjalon
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] [RFC] Testpmd RPC API
>
> If so, I think, gRPC servic
>
> If so, I think, gRPC service would be along with existing
> testpmd functions, like start_packet_forwarding().
It was my intention to re-use existing functions. I used the ACL tests as
an example because they are more self-contained then Testpmd, which made
creating the proof of concept much
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 11:19 PM Owen Hilyard wrote:
>>
>> scheme is probably over-engineered
>
>
> I tried my hardest to keep this as simple as possible. The requirements
> imposed by DTS being a distributed system in Python restricted what I could
> do a lot. Needing to be compatible with DPDK
>
> scheme is probably over-engineered
I tried my hardest to keep this as simple as possible. The requirements
imposed by DTS being a distributed system in Python restricted what I could
do a lot. Needing to be compatible with DPDK's license also got rid of a
lot of options. Binding generators ar
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 3:17 AM wrote:
>
> From: Owen Hilyard
>
> Currently, DTS uses Testpmd for most of its testing. This has been
> successful in reducing the need to create more test apps, but it has a few
> drawbacks. First, if some part of DPDK is not exposed via Testpmd or one of
> t
From: Owen Hilyard
Currently, DTS uses Testpmd for most of its testing. This has been
successful in reducing the need to create more test apps, but it has a few
drawbacks. First, if some part of DPDK is not exposed via Testpmd or one of the
example applications, for the purposes of DTS it
7 matches
Mail list logo
