Hi Clarylin,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Clearasu [mailto:clearasu at gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 9:38 AM > To: Lu, Wenzhuo > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] is ixgbe supporting multi-segment mbuf? > > Hi Wenzhuo, > > Thanks. For some reason, we have to stick to dpdk 2.0 for now. Is > multi-segment > mbuf supported in this version (any known issue with multi-seg in this > version?) > or do we have to upgrade to latest dpdk version for multi-segment support? Yes, I suggest to try at least 2.1. It should help. And to my opinion, the newer the better. As you know there'll be more functions and less bugs :) > > Clarylin > > > On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Clarylin, > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Clarylin L > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 4:24 AM > >> To: dev at dpdk.org > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] is ixgbe supporting multi-segment mbuf? > >> > >> ixgbe_recv_scattered_pkts was set to be the rx function. Receiving > >> packets > > I see this function is already deprecated. Do you use an old version? Would > you like to try the newest code? > > > >> smaller than mbuf size works perfectly. However, if an incoming > >> packet is greater than the maximum acceptable length of one "mbuf" > >> data size, receiving does not work. In this case, isn't it supposed to use > >> mbuf > chaining to receive? > >> > >> The port has both jumbo_frame and enable_scatter being on. are these > >> two flags good enough to make mbuf chaining going?
