> On 2 Jul 2018, at 02:25, Kevin Wilson wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
> My question is about VPP and DPDK PMD drivers: can any NIC which has support
> in the DPDK official releases be used with VPP ?
Yes
--
Damjan
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/R
Hello,
My question is about VPP and DPDK PMD drivers: can any NIC which has support
in the DPDK official releases be used with VPP ? or are there any specific
requirements (hw/sw)
that the PMD should support ? (like for example,
CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_AVF_INC_VECTOR=y with I40E,
or maybe that "vect
The 'fix' in the Niantic vPMD was rejected upstream in DPDK for solid
reasons - it causes a performance degradation in the Niantic vPMD .
I completely agree that this 'fix', fixing Niantic PType support is
beneficial for the VPP workload, there is no argument with this
upstream. The point wa
Looping in the deb_dpdk and rpm_dpdk projects to see if we can work
together on getting vpp out of the business of building DPDK (and DPDK
packages) while still retaining the ability to quickly incorporate fixes
like the one the Niantic driver.
Ed
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Damjan Marion (da
I think it is right time to start discussing post 17.01 release developments
and here I would like to propose some changes related to DPDK integration.
I see a need for changes in 2 areas:
1) building DPDK as part of VPP build and patch management
2) moving DPDK related code (input node, tx, buf
