On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:51:40AM -0800, Pravin B Shelar wrote: >> Currently dp-packet make use of ofpbuf for managing packet >> buffers. That complicates ofpbuf, by making dp-packet >> independent of ofpbuf both libraries can be optimized for >> their own use case. >> This avoids mapping operation between ofpbuf and dp_packet >> in datapath upcalls. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pravin B Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> > > I think I understand better now than I did from your quick description > over lunch last week. I think the idea is that every current use of an > ofpbuf to hold an Ethernet or IP packet changes to use a dp_packet > instead. Is that correct? > > The patch duplicates a lot of code from dp_packet to ofpbuf, but maybe > that's OK.
If we unify the code it result couple of broken API due to DPDK mbuf limits. Plus going forward DPDK packet will need more state in dp-packet. So it is better to separate it. We can always improve code later. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
