On 05/30, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >On Thu, 30 May 2019 17:07:05 +0800 >Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Implement zero copy of af_xdp pmd through mbuf's external memory >> mechanism to achieve high performance. >> >> This patch also provides a new parameter "pmd_zero_copy" for user, so they >> can choose to enable zero copy of af_xdp pmd or not. >> >> To be clear, "zero copy" here is different from the "zero copy mode" of >> AF_XDP, it is about zero copy between af_xdp umem and mbuf used in dpdk >> application. >> >> Suggested-by: Varghese Vipin <vipin.vargh...@intel.com> >> Suggested-by: Tummala Sivaprasad <sivaprasad.tumm...@intel.com> >> Suggested-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com> >> Signed-off-by: Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong...@intel.com> > >Why is this a parameter? Can it just be auto detected.
In case there might be situations when some users would perfer a slower copy mode, we can just let user decide. Thanks, Xiaolong >Remember configuration is evil, it hurts usability, code coverage >and increases complexity.
