Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

left here? > > > > BRs, > > Wisam Jaddo > > > > *From:* Georgios Katsikas > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 3, 2020 1:26 PM > *To:* wis...@mellanox.com > *Cc:* dev@dpdk.org > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches > > > > Hi, > > > > Any news on this patch? > > Is there anything else I could do? > > > > Thanks, > > Georgios > > > > > >

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

Hi, Any news on this patch? Is there anything else I could do? Thanks, Georgios On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 1:03 PM Georgios Katsikas wrote: > Currently, flow-perf measures the performance of > rule installation/deletion operations by breaking > down the entire number of operations int

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

Hi, Thanks for the feedback Thomas. Please see my updated patch, I hope it better explains the scope of this work. Best regards, Georgios On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 1:25 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 05/10/2020 19:16, Georgios Katsikas: > > Hi, > > > > What is the conclusio

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

average across the 2 measurements. Finally, this commit also adds default variables to the usage function instead of hardcoded values. Signed-off-by: Georgios Katsikas --- app/test-flow-perf/main.c | 86 -- doc/guides/tools/flow-perf.rst | 42 - 2

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

Hi, What is the conclusion? I haven't seen this patch being committed yet. Thanks, Georigos On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:01 PM Wisam Monther wrote: > Hi, > > >-Original Message- > >From: george@gmail.com On Behalf Of Georgios > >Katsikas > >Sent:

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/test-flow-perf: configurable rule batches

Hi Wisam, The patch is resubmitted as you suggested. thanks, Georgios On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 11:05 AM Wisam Monther wrote: > Hi Georgios, > > >-Original Message- > >From: george@gmail.com On Behalf Of Georgios > >Katsikas > >Sent: Tuesday, Septem

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/flow-perf: configurable rule batches

* One can now configure the number of rules per batch * Refactored flow_count variable to rules_count as it is related to the newly added rules_batch variable * Added default values to usage function Signed-off-by: Georgios Katsikas --- app/test-flow-perf/main.c | 87

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/test-flow-perf: configurable rule batches

* One can now configure the number of rules per batch * Refactored flow_count variable to rules_count as it is related to the newly added rules_batch variable * Added default values to usage function Signed-off-by: Georgios Katsikas --- app/test-flow-perf/main.c | 87

Re: [dpdk-dev] Testpmd parameter --enable-lro fails on Mellanox ConnectX5

f Penso > > > -Original Message- > > From: dev On Behalf Of Asaf Penso > > Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 5:07 PM > > To: Georgios Katsikas ; dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: Tom Barbette > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Testpmd parameter --enable-lro fails o

[dpdk-dev] Testpmd parameter --enable-lro fails on Mellanox ConnectX5

Hi all, In the latest features of the MLX5 PMD (i.e., DPDK 19.08), there is LRO hardware support. However, I cannot make it work with our dual port 100GbE Mellanox ConnectX5 (MT27800) card. Let me first describe the configuration of my testbed: First,I upgraded OFED to the latest 4.7-1.0.0 with f

Re: [dpdk-dev] Flow Director vs. 5-tuple filters on a 10GbE Intel 82599 ES NIC

This is a kind reminder to provide some feedback on this topic. Best regards, Georgios On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 4:31 PM Tom Barbette wrote: > ​CC-ing maintainers. > > > -- > *De :* Georgios Katsikas > *Envoyé :* mardi 4 décembre 2018 11:41 > *À

Re: [dpdk-dev] Flow Director vs. 5-tuple filters on a 10GbE Intel 82599 ES NIC

This is a kind reminder for my question above. Best regards, Georgios On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 12:41 PM Georgios Katsikas wrote: > Dear all, > > I am performing rule installation/deletion benchmarks on a dual port 10 > GbE Intel 82599 ES NIC using DPDK 18.11. > The benchmark inst

[dpdk-dev] Flow Director vs. 5-tuple filters on a 10GbE Intel 82599 ES NIC

Dear all, I am performing rule installation/deletion benchmarks on a dual port 10 GbE Intel 82599 ES NIC using DPDK 18.11. The benchmark installs increasing number of rules (5 to 8000), measures the rule installation rate and latency and then deletes the rules (measuring again the rule deletion ra

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: move variables definition in source

, 2018 at 12:53 PM Georgios P. Katsikas wrote: > From: Georgios Katsikas > > This patch moves the definition of 3 variables in testpmd.h > into the respective .c file. The idea behind this move is > to allow external applications to compile against testpmd > without throwing

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] lib/cmdline: Cross platform fixes for cmdline_flow

Signed-off-by: Georgios Katsikas --- app/test-pmd/Makefile | 2 + app/test-pmd/cmdline.c| 4 + app/test-pmd/testpmd.h| 14 - lib/librte_cmdline/Makefile | 3 + lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_flow.c | 555 ++-- lib

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] app/testpmd: Added new line and parenthesized macros

Signed-off-by: Georgios Katsikas --- lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_flow.h | 2 +- lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_flow.h b/lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_flow.h index 45219d5..7066254 100644 --- a/lib

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pktgen-stats/latency: fix RTE version in lib includes

--- app/pktgen-latency.c | 2 +- app/pktgen-stats.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/app/pktgen-latency.c b/app/pktgen-latency.c index 9c83748..7cfc1d5 100644 --- a/app/pktgen-latency.c +++ b/app/pktgen-latency.c @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ #include "pktgen.h" -#