On Wed, 6 Nov, 2019, 5:46 pm Burakov, Anatoly,
wrote:
> On 04-Nov-19 12:59 PM, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote:
> > Hi Anatoly and All,
> >
> > Just wondering what would the side effect of lowering a _bit_ of static
> uint64_t baseaddr = 0x1 in
> > lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memory
On 04-Nov-19 12:59 PM, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote:
Hi Anatoly and All,
Just wondering what would the side effect of lowering a _bit_ of static
uint64_t baseaddr = 0x1 in
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memory.c for 64bit systems.
Use case:
If we _reserve_ VA address which less t
Hi Jerin,
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 12:59:40PM +, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote:
> Hi Anatoly and All,
>
> Just wondering what would the side effect of lowering a _bit_ of static
> uint64_t baseaddr = 0x1 in
> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memory.c for 64bit systems.
>
> Use ca
Hi Anatoly and All,
Just wondering what would the side effect of lowering a _bit_ of static
uint64_t baseaddr = 0x1 in
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memory.c for 64bit systems.
Use case:
If we _reserve_ VA address which less than 2^32 ONLY for packet buffers(mbuf),
The use cases li
4 matches
Mail list logo