On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 10:44:21AM +0800, yang_y_yi wrote:
> Hi, William
>
>
> I used OVS DPDK to test it, you shouldn't add tap interface to ovs DPDK
> bridge if you use vdev to add tap, virtio_user is just for it, but that won't
> use this receive function to receive packets.
Right.
I mean
Hi, William
I used OVS DPDK to test it, you shouldn't add tap interface to ovs DPDK bridge
if you use vdev to add tap, virtio_user is just for it, but that won't use this
receive function to receive packets.
At 2019-12-17 02:55:50, "William Tu" wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 02:09:24AM
On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 02:09:24AM -0500, yang_y...@163.com wrote:
> From: Yi Yang
>
> Current netdev_linux_rxq_recv_tap and netdev_linux_rxq_recv_sock
> just receive single packet, that is very inefficient, per my test
> case which adds two tap ports or veth ports into OVS bridge
>
On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 02:09:24AM -0500, yang_y...@163.com wrote:
> From: Yi Yang
>
> Current netdev_linux_rxq_recv_tap and netdev_linux_rxq_recv_sock
> just receive single packet, that is very inefficient, per my test
> case which adds two tap ports or veth ports into OVS bridge
>
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 11:09 PM wrote:
>
> From: Yi Yang
>
> Current netdev_linux_rxq_recv_tap and netdev_linux_rxq_recv_sock
> just receive single packet, that is very inefficient, per my test
> case which adds two tap ports or veth ports into OVS bridge
> (datapath_type=netdev) and use iperf3
From: Yi Yang
Current netdev_linux_rxq_recv_tap and netdev_linux_rxq_recv_sock
just receive single packet, that is very inefficient, per my test
case which adds two tap ports or veth ports into OVS bridge
(datapath_type=netdev) and use iperf3 to do performance test
between two ports (they are
