On 16/11/2018 17:20, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 11/15/2018 7:02 PM, Lam, Tiago wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> OvS-DPDK has recently had small a change that changed the data room
>> available in an mbuf (commit dfaf00e in OvS). This seems to have had the
>> consequence of breaking the initialisation of eth_
On 11/15/2018 7:02 PM, Lam, Tiago wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> OvS-DPDK has recently had small a change that changed the data room
> available in an mbuf (commit dfaf00e in OvS). This seems to have had the
> consequence of breaking the initialisation of eth_af_packets interfaces,
> when using default val
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:02:37PM +, Lam, Tiago wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> OvS-DPDK has recently had small a change that changed the data room
> available in an mbuf (commit dfaf00e in OvS). This seems to have had the
> consequence of breaking the initialisation of eth_af_packets interfaces,
> whe
On 15-Nov-18 7:02 PM, Lam, Tiago wrote:
Hi guys,
OvS-DPDK has recently had small a change that changed the data room
available in an mbuf (commit dfaf00e in OvS). This seems to have had the
consequence of breaking the initialisation of eth_af_packets interfaces,
when using default values ("optio
Hi guys,
OvS-DPDK has recently had small a change that changed the data room
available in an mbuf (commit dfaf00e in OvS). This seems to have had the
consequence of breaking the initialisation of eth_af_packets interfaces,
when using default values ("options:dpdk-
devargs=eth_af_packet0,iface=enp6
5 matches
Mail list logo