> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 6 January 2022 13.41
>
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 11:50:54AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, 6 January 2022 10.49
> >
> > Thank you for the thorough expl
On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 11:50:54AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, 6 January 2022 10.49
>
> Thank you for the thorough explanation, Olivier.
>
> Somewhat exotic scenarios, but they do make sense!
>
> As you might have guessed
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.m...@6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 6 January 2022 10.49
Thank you for the thorough explanation, Olivier.
Somewhat exotic scenarios, but they do make sense!
As you might have guessed, I was wondering if rte_pktmbuf_reset_headroom()
could be optimized by simply
Hi Morten,
On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 10:29:11AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> The data_room_size parameter description for the mbuf pool creation functions
> says:
> "Size of data buffer in each mbuf, including RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM."
>
> Furthermore, both rte_mbuf_data_iova_defaul
Hi Olivier,
The data_room_size parameter description for the mbuf pool creation functions
says:
"Size of data buffer in each mbuf, including RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM."
Furthermore, both rte_mbuf_data_iova_default() and rte_mbuf_data_addr_default()
simply add RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM to the return value
5 matches
Mail list logo