On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:03:36 +0000 "Wang, Yipeng1" <yipeng1.w...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Vincent, > > Thanks for the comments and some quick responses below: > > - DPDK Bloom Filter is derived from the libbloom (as shown by the included > BSD license), but optimized for performance with various DPDK goodness such > as rte_zmalloc, rte_bitmap, rte_jhash, etc. It doesn't seem appropriate to > bring those DPDK specific features into libbloom, which is designed for more > generic environments. > - DPDK Bloom Filter is just one very basic mode among other more > sophisticated ones in the DPDK Membership Library, which supports a different > set of APIs (e.g., bulk lookup, multi-match, etc.) than those supported in > libbloom. > - It may make sense to bring some generic (i.e., non DPDK specific) > improvements back to libbloom once identified. > > Thanks > Yipeng > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vincent Jardin [mailto:vincent.jar...@6wind.com] > > Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 2:42 AM > > To: Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.w...@intel.com> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Gobriel, Sameh <sameh.gobr...@intel.com>; Wang, Ren > > <ren.w...@intel.com>; Tai, Charlie <charlie....@intel.com> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] Add Membership Library > > > > Why duplicating Jyri's libbloom - https://github.com/jvirkki/libbloom - for > > this > > DPDK capability? Why not showing that you can contribute to libbloom and > > make it linkable with the DPDK? > > > > There are so many duplicated code... > > > > Thank you, > > Vincent > > > Note: rte_zmalloc is really no faster in my experience than regular malloc. And under memory pressure rte_malloc is worse than malloc.
