[dpdk-dev] IRC Channel, Come Guys ;)

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
Hello, 2014-04-01 23:35, Fred Pedrisa: > I've created an unofficial channel in freenode irc network, so for those > interested in joining there for a better chatting here are the informations > > Server : irc.freenode.net > Channel : ##dpdk (Yes, you must type two sharps). Why not use #dpdk ? -

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
Hello, Sorry for the long delay. 2014-02-24 08:52, Chris Wright: > > pkg/rpm.spec | 143 > > This should be dpdk.spec Actually it should be dpdk-core.spec. Since it is a file hosted in the project, is it mandatory to have such naming? Could you explain why? When building it with "rpmbuild -ta

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
Hello, Sorry for the long delay. 2014-02-26 14:07, Thomas Graf: > On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > +Version: 1.5.2r1 > > +Release: 1 > > What kind of upgrade strategy do you have in mind? > > I'm raising this because Fedora and other distributions will require > a unique packa

[dpdk-dev] [vmxnet3-usermap PATCH 07/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2014-02-26 14:22, Thomas Graf: > On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > +BuildRequires: dpdk-core-devel, kernel-devel, kernel-headers > > +Requires: dpdk-core-runtime > > How does the compatibility mapping look like? I assume a given vmxnet3 > version can only be linked against certain

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Graf
On 04/02/2014 11:53 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-02-26 14:07, Thomas Graf: >>> +BuildRequires: kernel-devel, kernel-headers, doxygen >> >> Is a python environment required as well? > > Python is only needed to run some tools on the target. But is is optional. > Do you think it should be writte

[dpdk-dev] [vmxnet3-usermap PATCH 07/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Graf
On 04/02/2014 12:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-02-26 14:22, Thomas Graf: >> On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> +BuildRequires: dpdk-core-devel, kernel-devel, kernel-headers >>> +Requires: dpdk-core-runtime >> >> How does the compatibility mapping look like? I assume a given v

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Graf
On 04/02/2014 11:01 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hello, > > Sorry for the long delay. > > 2014-02-24 08:52, Chris Wright: >>> pkg/rpm.spec | 143 >> >> This should be dpdk.spec > > Actually it should be dpdk-core.spec. > Since it is a file hosted in the project, is it mandatory to have such namin

[dpdk-dev] IRC Channel, Come Guys ;)

2014-04-02 Thread Neil Horman
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 10:13:30AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hello, > > 2014-04-01 23:35, Fred Pedrisa: > > I've created an unofficial channel in freenode irc network, so for those > > interested in joining there for a better chatting here are the informations > > > > Server : irc.freenode.

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal_common_cpuflags: Fix %rbx corruption, and simplify the code

2014-04-02 Thread Neil Horman
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 01:51:04PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 03/25/2014 12:52 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > Neil Horman reported that on x86-64 the upper half of %rbx would get > > clobbered when the code was compiled PIC or PIE, because the > > i386-specific code to preserve %ebx was incorrec

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

2014-04-02 Thread Neil Horman
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:53:51AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hello, > > Sorry for the long delay. > > 2014-02-26 14:07, Thomas Graf: > > On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > +Version: 1.5.2r1 > > > +Release: 1 > > > > What kind of upgrade strategy do you have in mind? > >

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal_common_cpuflags: Fix %rbx corruption, and simplify the code

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2014-04-02 07:16, Neil Horman: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 01:51:04PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 03/25/2014 12:52 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > > Neil Horman reported that on x86-64 the upper half of %rbx would get > > > clobbered when the code was compiled PIC or PIE, because the > > > i386-sp

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal_common_cpuflags: Fix %rbx corruption, and simplify the code

2014-04-02 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2014-03-25 13:51, H. Peter Anvin: > On 03/25/2014 12:52 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > Neil Horman reported that on x86-64 the upper half of %rbx would get > > clobbered when the code was compiled PIC or PIE, because the > > i386-specific code to preserve %ebx was incorrectly compiled. > > > > However

[dpdk-dev] Issues on FDIR and multi-processes

2014-04-02 Thread Mauro Annarumma
Hi everyone, we are working with Flow DIRector on a multiprocess application. This application consists of N secondary processes, each one receiving packets directly from its own queue on the NIC. It works fine when each secondary process runs on a different CPU core; instead, if we try to run t

[dpdk-dev] Issues on FDIR and multi-processes

2014-04-02 Thread Richardson, Bruce
> -Original Message- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Mauro Annarumma > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 4:02 PM > To: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Issues on FDIR and multi-processes > > Hi everyone, > we are working with Flow DIRector on a multiprocess app