On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 09:40:18AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
Hi Aaron,
>
> I missed your original reply to me. Sorry.
>
> Ferruh Yigit writes:
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 01:29:32PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >> On 01/19/2016 11:59 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 18
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 01:30:35PM +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 01:29:32PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > On 01/19/2016 11:59 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:20:02AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
> >>> Ferruh Yigit writes:
> This work is to make
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 01:29:32PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 01/19/2016 11:59 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:20:02AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
>>> Ferruh Yigit writes:
This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
Linux tools to
Hi Ferruh,
I missed your original reply to me. Sorry.
Ferruh Yigit writes:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 01:29:32PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> On 01/19/2016 11:59 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:20:02AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
Ferruh Yigit writes:
> This wor
On 01/19/2016 11:59 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:20:02AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> Ferruh Yigit writes:
>>> This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
>>> Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
>>
>> This is a good goal. Only question - why us
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 05:48:51PM -0600, Jay Rolette wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger <
> stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:18:01 +
> > Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >
> > > This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using c
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:20:02AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Ferruh Yigit writes:
> > This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
> > Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
>
> This is a good goal. Only question - why use an additional kernel module
> to do this? Is i
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger <
stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:18:01 +
> Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>
> > This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
> > Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
> >
> > Patch is based on KN
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:48:51 -0600
Jay Rolette wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger <
> stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:18:01 +
> > Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >
> > > This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:18:01 +
Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
> Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
>
> Patch is based on KNI but contains only control functionality of it,
> also this patch does not include any Linux kernel net
Ferruh Yigit writes:
> This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
> Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
This is a good goal. Only question - why use an additional kernel module
to do this? Is it _JUST_ for ethtool support? I think the other stuff
can be accomplished
This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
Patch is based on KNI but contains only control functionality of it,
also this patch does not include any Linux kernel network driver as
part of it.
Basically with the help of a kernel mod
12 matches
Mail list logo
