On Jan 9, 2019, at 5:46 AM, David Marchand
mailto:david.march...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:19 PM Yongseok Koh
mailto:ys...@mellanox.com>> wrote:
This patch introduces two new functions - rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default() and
rte_mbuf_data_baddr_default().
rte_mbuf_buf_addr_defau
> On Jan 9, 2019, at 5:39 PM, Rami Rosen wrote:
>
> Hi, Yongseok,
>
> Maybe you should consider using the pool member of the mbuf, instead of
> passing it as a parameter for rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default().
> The pool member of mbuf indicates the pool from which it was allocated.
> See
> http://g
Hi, Yongseok,
Maybe you should consider using the pool member of the mbuf, instead of
passing it as a parameter for rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default().
The pool member of mbuf indicates the pool from which it was allocated.
See
http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h#n631
And actually t
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:19 PM Yongseok Koh wrote:
> This patch introduces two new functions - rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default() and
> rte_mbuf_data_baddr_default().
>
> rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default() reutrns the default buffer address of given
> mbuf which comes after mbuf structure and private data.
>
This patch introduces two new functions - rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default() and
rte_mbuf_data_baddr_default().
rte_mbuf_buf_addr_default() reutrns the default buffer address of given
mbuf which comes after mbuf structure and private data.
rte_mbuf_data_baddr_default() returns the default address of mbu
5 matches
Mail list logo
