2014-07-14 09:46, John W. Linville:
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:34:46AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2014-07-11 13:40, John W. Linville:
> > > Is there an example of code in DPDK that requires specific kernel
> > > versions? What is the preferred method for coding such dependencies?
> >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:31 AM
> To: John W. Linville
> Cc: Zhou, Danny; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for
> AF_PACKET-based virtual devices
>
> On Tue, J
> -Original Message-
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 2:31 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: Making space in mbuf data-structure
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ri
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:01:11AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 08:17:44AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:15:49AM +, Zhou, Danny wrote:
> > > According to my performance measurement results for 64B small
> > > packet, 1 queue perf. is better
> -Original Message-
> From: John W. Linville [mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:01 PM
> To: Neil Horman
> Cc: Zhou, Danny; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for
> AF_PACKET-based virtual devices
>
> On Tue, J
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:18 PM
> To: Zhou, Danny
> Cc: John W. Linville; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for
> AF_PACKET-based virtual devices
>
> On Tue, Jul
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:40:56PM +, Zhou, Danny wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John W. Linville [mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:01 PM
> > To: Neil Horman
> > Cc: Zhou, Danny; dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] libr
Hi Hiroshi ,
Thanks for your comments ...
I found dpdk1.6 doesn't work for MEMNIC.1.2 ..
I tried with dpdk-1.7 .. It worked for me ..
1. host_sim app in host
[root at localhost host-sim]# ./memnic-host-sim /dev/shm/ivshm
reset
reset
reset
2. test pmd app in guest ..
[root at localhost test-p
Hi Srinivas,
> Subject: FW: MENNIC1.2 host-sim crashed for me
>
>
> Hi Hiroshi,
> Thanks for ur reply .. I have moved forward little bit.
>
> MEMNIC-1.2
>
> 1. I started qemu and then started host-sim application
>
> Qemu command :
> qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu host -boot c -hda
>
Hi Hiroshi,
Thanks for ur reply .. I have moved forward little bit.
MEMNIC-1.2
1. I started qemu and then started host-sim application
Qemu command :
qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu host -boot c -hda
/home/vm-images/vm1-clone.img -m 8192M -smp 3 --enable-kvm -name vm1 -vnc :1
-pidfile /
fix doxygen for rte_port_out_op_flush.
Signed-off-by: Yao Zhao
---
lib/librte_port/rte_port.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_port/rte_port.h b/lib/librte_port/rte_port.h
index 0934b00..1d763c2 100644
--- a/lib/librte_port/rte_port.h
+++ b/lib/librt
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 08:17:44AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:15:49AM +, Zhou, Danny wrote:
> > According to my performance measurement results for 64B small
> > packet, 1 queue perf. is better than 16 queues (1.35M pps vs. 0.93M
> > pps) which make sense to me as fo
Hi Bruce,
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 12:39 AM
> To: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Making space in mbuf data-structure
>
> Hi all,
>
> At this stage it's been well recognised that w
Hi Oliver,
>
> As this change would impact the core of DPDK, I think it would be
> interesting to list some representative use-cases in order to evaluate
> the cost of each solution. This will also help for future modifications,
> and could be included in a sort of non-regression test?
>
I thi
Hi,
What are the plans to resolve this issue? Will this patch get upstreamed?
http://www.dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-June/003591.html
Thanks,
Mark
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:15:49AM +, Zhou, Danny wrote:
> According to my performance measurement results for 64B small packet, 1 queue
> perf. is better than 16 queues (1.35M pps vs. 0.93M pps) which make sense to
> me as for 16 queues case more CPU cycles (16 queues' 87% vs. 1 queue' 80%)
According to my performance measurement results for 64B small packet, 1 queue
perf. is better than 16 queues (1.35M pps vs. 0.93M pps) which make sense to me
as for 16 queues case more CPU cycles (16 queues' 87% vs. 1 queue' 80%) in
kernel land needed for NAPI-enabled ixgbe driver to switch betw
Hi,
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] MENNIC1.2 host-sim crashed for me
>
> Hi,
> I want to run MEMNIC 1.2 application .
>
> 1. I compiled DPDK1.6
>
> 2. I compiled memnic.12
>
> 3. And while running memnic-hostsim appgot strucked
>
> 4.
>
> 5. [root at localhost host-sim]# .
18 matches
Mail list logo
