Le 30/04/2020 à 09:36, Matan Azrad a écrit :
Hi Tom
From: Tom Barbette
Great news!
- I can understand why there is no timeout unit. But that's calling for user
nightmare. Eg I could only get from the code (and not from documentation
yet? ) of the following mlx5 driver patch that the value
Hi Tom
From: Tom Barbette
> Great news!
>
> - I can understand why there is no timeout unit. But that's calling for user
> nightmare. Eg I could only get from the code (and not from documentation
> yet? ) of the following mlx5 driver patch that the value should be in tenth of
> seconds. If I bui
Great news!
- I can understand why there is no timeout unit. But that's calling for
user nightmare. Eg I could only get from the code (and not from
documentation yet? ) of the following mlx5 driver patch that the value
should be in tenth of seconds. If I build an application that is
supposed
On 4/21/2020 11:11 AM, Bill Zhou wrote:
> From: Dong Zhou
>
> One of the reasons to destroy a flow is the fact that no packet matches the
> flow for "timeout" time.
> For example, when TCP\UDP sessions are suddenly closed.
>
> Currently, there is not any DPDK mechanism for flow aging and the
> a
From: Dong Zhou
One of the reasons to destroy a flow is the fact that no packet matches the
flow for "timeout" time.
For example, when TCP\UDP sessions are suddenly closed.
Currently, there is not any DPDK mechanism for flow aging and the
applications use their own ways to detect and destroy age
5 matches
Mail list logo
