> -Original Message-
> From: Matan Azrad [mailto:ma...@mellanox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon ; Gaetan Rivet
> ; Wu, Jingjing
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Neil Horman ; Richardson, Bruce
> ; Ananyev, Konstantin
>
> Subject: [PATCH v3 3/7] ethdev: add por
18/01/2018 17:35, Matan Azrad:
> The ownership of a port is implicit in DPDK.
> Making it explicit is better from the next reasons:
> 1. It will define well who is in charge of the port usage synchronization.
> 2. A library could work on top of a port.
> 3. A port can work on top of another port.
>
The ownership of a port is implicit in DPDK.
Making it explicit is better from the next reasons:
1. It will define well who is in charge of the port usage synchronization.
2. A library could work on top of a port.
3. A port can work on top of another port.
Also in the fail-safe case, an issue has
3 matches
Mail list logo
