02:47
>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Instability of port ids
>>>
>>> Several customers have reported similar issues with how the owned/stack
>>> device model
>>> works in DPDK. With failsafe/tap and VF or netvsc and VF there are
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 1:46 PM Stephen Hemminger <
step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> Several customers have reported similar issues with how the owned/stack
> device model
> works in DPDK. With failsafe/tap and VF or netvsc and VF there are DPDK
> ports which
> are marked as owned and therefor
On Sat, 18 May 2019 06:03:22 +
"Wang, Haiyue" wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 02:47
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev]
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 02:47
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Instability of port ids
>
> Several customers have reported similar issues with how the owned/
Several customers have reported similar issues with how the owned/stack device
model
works in DPDK. With failsafe/tap and VF or netvsc and VF there are DPDK ports
which
are marked as owned and therefore not visible.
The problem is the application has to guess and workaround these port values in
5 matches
Mail list logo
