Hi Zhangkun,
Do you talk about resource management of DPDK when a process is finished?
If so, I guess DPDK doesn't care so much about freeing resources once
allocated by the process.
For example, there is no function to free a mempool.
Thanks,
Tetsuya
(2014/09/05 12:39), Zhangkun (K) wrote:
> Hi
original cord. :)
Thanks,
Tetsuya
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tetsuya.Mukawa [mailto:mukawa at igel.co.jp]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 11:39 AM
>> To: Xie, Huawei; dev at dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] lib/librte_vhost: vhost library s
Hi Huawei,
I added few comments. Mainly those comments are about source code indent.
(2014/09/02 17:55), Huawei Xie wrote:
> +
> +/**
> + * Structure contains variables relevant to RX/TX virtqueues.
> + */
> +struct vhost_virtqueue {
> + /**< descriptor ring. */
> + struct vring_desc*
>>> Changchun
>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Tetsuya.Mukawa [mailto:mukawa at igel.co.jp]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 12:39 PM
>>>> To: Ouyang, Changchun; dev at dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: Xie, Huawei; Katsuya
n speed between unix domain socket and CUSE. I am not
>> sure which is faster.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tetsuya
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Changchun
>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Tetsuya.Mukawa [mailto:mukawa
(2014/08/27 14:27), Tetsuya.Mukawa wrote:
> Hi Changchun,
>
> (2014/08/27 14:01), Ouyang, Changchun wrote:
>> Agree with you, the performance should be same as the data path (RX/TX) is
>> not affected,
>> The difference between implementation only exists in the vir
e.
Anyway, about device creation and destruction, the difference will come
from transmission speed between unix domain socket and CUSE. I am not
sure which is faster.
Thanks,
Tetsuya
>
> Regards,
> Changchun
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tetsuya.Mukawa [mailto
(2014/08/27 9:43), Ouyang, Changchun wrote:
> Do we have performance comparison between both implementation?
Hi Changchun,
If DPDK applications are running on both guest and host side, the
performance should be almost same, because while transmitting data virt
queues are accessed by virtio-net PM
Hi Meir,
(2014/04/13 19:21), Meir Tseitlin wrote:
> The problem is that in 30% of the cases data packet enters the path of
> control packet instead of expected answer. Which probably means that after
> my packet type check, the mbuf is overwritten before handled properly.
If you are using DPDK-1.5
(2013/11/28 19:46), Richardson, Bruce wrote:
>> If someone wants to implement forwarding application that receives
>> packets from ETH_A and send those to ETH_B.
>> Also above application is split to 3 processes like following.
>> [ETH_A]-->Process_A --> [Ring_A] --> Process_B --> [Ring_B] --> Proc
> [BR] Firstly, to identify the ring PMD's vs the ethernet device PMDs you can
> use the information in the rte_eth_dev structure. For each device x, (0 <= x
> <=5), if you check rte_eth_devices[x], the ring pmd's will have a NULL driver
> pointer and the pci address given in the pci_dev structu
Hi,
I have a question about how to know corresponding device from port number.
For example, if I have 4 Ethernet devices and 2 Ring PMDs, I will get 6
ports during initialization.
In the case, how can I know which port corresponds last Ring PMD?
Regards,
Tetsuya Mukawa
Hi Thomas,
I've sent the patch to fix an uninitialized variable access.
Could you please check it?
I will send ver.2 patch if I need.
Thanks,
Tetsuya Mukawa
(2013/09/04 16:34), Tetsuya Mukawa wrote:
> If CONFIG_RTE_EAL_UNBIND_PORTS is set and virtio-net is used, an unopened
> file descriptor wil
13 matches
Mail list logo
