Re:Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

Hi,Stephen Thank you very much for your reply! >I would just replace all of the rte_memcpy with memcpy I will replace all of the rte_memcpy with memcpy. >I expect that rte_memcpy() is able to do better than memcpy() for larger >copies because it is >likely to use bigger vector instructions and c

Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 11:52:25 +0800 (CST) "Huichao Cai" wrote: > Hi,Stephen > > > There are some things I don't quite understand.Hope you can answer that. > This will help me avoid similar errors in subsequent patch submissions.Thanks! > > > There are places where rte_memcpy functions are used

Re:Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

Hi,Stephen There are some things I don't quite understand.Hope you can answer that. This will help me avoid similar errors in subsequent patch submissions.Thanks! There are places where rte_memcpy functions are used： In test_ipfrag.c： from func test_

Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 17:10:46 +0200 David Marchand wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 5:27 AM Huichao Cai wrote: > > > > According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. > > They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). > > What is optional is their transmission in

Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 5:27 AM Huichao Cai wrote: > > According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. > They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). > What is optional is their transmission in any particular datagram, > not their implementation.So we have to dea

Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

15/04/2022 10:29, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. > > They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). > > What is optional is their transmission in any particular datagram, > > not their implementation.So we have to deal with

Re: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

Hi Huichao, Hi Konstantin, This patch has been around for a long time, so what's next? I acked it, which means that I am ok with that patch to go in. Now it is up to main tree maintainers to pull it in. Konstantin Huichao,Cai At 2022-04-15 16:29:10, "Ananyev, Konstantin" wrote: Accor

Re:RE: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

Hi Konstantin, This patch has been around for a long time, so what's next? Huichao,Cai At 2022-04-15 16:29:10, "Ananyev, Konstantin" wrote: >> According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. >> They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). >> What is optional is

Re:RE: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

Hi Konstantin, This patch has been around for a long time, so what's next? Huichao,Cai At 2022-04-15 16:29:10, "Ananyev, Konstantin" wrote: >> According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. >> They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). >> What is optional is

RE: [PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

> According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. > They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). > What is optional is their transmission in any particular datagram, > not their implementation.So we have to deal with it during the > fragmenting process.Add some te

[PATCH v7] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

According to RFC791,the options may appear or not in datagrams. They must be implemented by all IP modules (host and gateways). What is optional is their transmission in any particular datagram, not their implementation.So we have to deal with it during the fragmenting process.Add some test data fo