Hello Bala,
Thanks for the clarification of below query.
In the continuation, ODP classification document
http://www.opendataplane.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ODP_Classifier.docx.pdf
describes that precedence is undetermined in case of multiple pmr matched with
received frame. See
Ping.
api: packet_io: added parse mode can be left out for now, others should be OK
to merge.
-Petri
-Original Message-
From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext
Petri Savolainen
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 4:12 PM
To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
On 5 May 2015 at 18:49, Ciprian Barbu ciprian.ba...@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Ciprian Barbu ciprian.ba...@linaro.org
wrote:
Maybe Anders can better reply to this, but I can throw in my two cents.
In general it's useful to look at the lng ci bundle stream:
BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Google Inc//Google Calendar 70.9054//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:REQUEST
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20150615
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20150620
DTSTAMP:20150507T193351Z
ORGANIZER;CN=LNG Global Team Calendar:mailto:linaro.org_9fv4qa2pilfc8imvjn1
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Maxim Uvarov maxim.uva...@linaro.org
wrote:
Here I have patches from api-next needed to be merged to master:
https://git.linaro.org/people/maxim.uvarov/odp.git/shortlog/refs/heads/api-next
There are 4 commits:
5f9b8df example: classifier: remove
Lazy parsing defers parsing until the results are actually needed.
This allows applications that do their own parsing and never reference
ODP parse results to avoid the overhead of SW parsing.
Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer bill.fischo...@linaro.org
---
Changes in v4:
- Rebase to avoid merge
Lazy parsing defers parsing until the results are actually needed.
This allows applications that do their own parsing and never reference
ODP parse results to avoid the overhead of SW parsing.
Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer bill.fischo...@linaro.org
---
Changes in v5:
- Streamline implementation
On 6 May 2015 at 22:48, Mike Holmes mike.hol...@linaro.org wrote:
On 6 May 2015 at 11:26, Christophe Milard christophe.mil...@linaro.org
wrote:
Hi,
Yet another try to reach a acceptable solution regarding the test
environment, following tuesday meeting.
Here comes the n+2th
It's only this patch, there won't be a series.
-Petri
-Original Message-
From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext
Petri Savolainen
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 2:34 PM
To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
Subject: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/3] example: classifier:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Hongbo Zhang hongbo.zh...@linaro.org wrote:
On 5 May 2015 at 18:49, Ciprian Barbu ciprian.ba...@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Ciprian Barbu ciprian.ba...@linaro.org
wrote:
Maybe Anders can better reply to this, but I can throw in my two
Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes mike.hol...@linaro.org
---
V2
Reduce the number fo files touched.
platform/Makefile.inc | 4
platform/linux-generic/odp_impl.c | 14 --
scripts/git_hash.sh | 9 +
3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Worker threads are created with odph_linux_pthread_create()
which calls odp_local_init() before entering the function.
Signed-off-by: Petri Savolainen petri.savolai...@nokia.com
---
example/classifier/odp_classifier.c | 7 ---
1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git
I agree with Ola here on preserving the ingress order.
However, I have experienced same performance issue as Nikhil pointed out
(atomic queues have too much overhead for short critical section)
I am not sure about any other HW but Cavium has support for
introducing the critical section while
Merged,
Maxim.
On 04/30/2015 17:04, Stuart Haslam wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:40:51AM +0300, alexandru.badici...@linaro.org wrote:
From: Alexandru Badicioiu alexandru.badici...@linaro.org
Some tests poll input queues for packets but the queues
are setup as scheduled.
Signed-off-by:
Merged,
Maxim.
On 05/06/2015 15:29, Bill Fischofer wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
nmo...@kalray.eu mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin nmo...@kalray.eu
mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu
Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer
Merged,
Maxim.
On 05/07/2015 16:50, Bill Fischofer wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
nmo...@kalray.eu mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin nmo...@kalray.eu
mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu
Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer
I noticed the same and will add that documentation.
-Petri
From: ext Bala Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 3:49 PM
To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
Cc: LNG ODP Mailman List
Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/3] example: classifier: remove extra local
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin nmo...@kalray.eu
wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin nmo...@kalray.eu
Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer bill.fischo...@linaro.org
---
Submitted this patch a couple of weeks ago with a bad title ( [PATCHv2]
Use inttypes
Merged,
Maxim.
On 05/05/2015 14:54, Bill Fischofer wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:24 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
nmo...@kalray.eu mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin nmo...@kalray.eu
mailto:nmo...@kalray.eu
Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer
On 2015-05-07 16:26, Bill Fischofer wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Maxim Uvarov maxim.uva...@linaro.org
wrote:
Here I have patches from api-next needed to be merged to master:
https://git.linaro.org/people/maxim.uvarov/odp.git/shortlog/refs/heads/api-next
There are 4
Hi!
I just started to test ODP, trying to write my first application, but
found a problem: if I want to write NUMA aware code, how should I
allocate memory close to a given thread? I mean, I know there is
libnuma, but should I use it? I guess not, but I cannot find memory
allocation
Using atomic queues will preserve the ingress order when allocating and
assigning the sequence number. Also you don't need to use an expensive
atomic operation for updating the sequence number as the atomic queue and
scheduling will provide mutual exclusion.
If the packets that require a sequence
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1394
--- Comment #2 from Ciprian Barbu ciprian.ba...@linaro.org ---
Patch applied:
https://git.linaro.org/lng/odp-netmap.git/commit/cf5a145a1bb40a9ffe3367af8a8a9710062e4a36
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1394
Mike Holmes mike.hol...@linaro.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1449
--- Comment #1 from Ola Liljedahl ola.liljed...@linaro.org ---
Does this error occur all of the time for the specific configuration (e.g. 5
CPU's?) or is this problem intermittent?
I was thinking that if the test (it is just the timer example?) is
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1375
Mike Holmes mike.hol...@linaro.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
On 4 May 2015 at 19:19, Maxim Uvarov maxim.uva...@linaro.org wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 13:40, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
petri.savolai...@nokia.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: ext Maxim Uvarov [mailto:maxim.uva...@linaro.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 4:24
Hi,
I'm not aware of any such interface, but others with more knowledge can
comment about it. The ODP-DPDK implementation creates buffer pools on
the NUMA node where the pool create function were actually called.
Regards,
Zoli
On 07/05/15 16:32, Gábor Sándor Enyedi wrote:
Hi!
I just
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1440
--- Comment #3 from Bill Fischofer bill.fischo...@linaro.org ---
Merged into api-next commit 6df86e37
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
lng-odp mailing list
Another reason why the IPsec example uses atomic queues is that
linux-generic and other ODP implementations thatt use SW scheduling do not
support ordered queues... So atomic queues are used instead. I think the
example still uses an atomic operation for the sequence number allocation
which isn't
Here I have patches from api-next needed to be merged to master:
https://git.linaro.org/people/maxim.uvarov/odp.git/shortlog/refs/heads/api-next
There are 4 commits:
5f9b8df example: classifier: remove odp_pmr_create_range() support
dab82ac validation: remove test case for
Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan bala.manoha...@linaro.org
IMO, we can add additional information in odph_linux_pthread_create()
header file documentation that this function is expected to call
odp_init_local() for the thread it creates. Current documentation only says
the following
/**
*
32 matches
Mail list logo
