On 27/11/2015 19:30, Ben Pfaff wrote:
It doesn't make the damnest
>difference for the user if "yum install openvswitch" pulls in an additional
>package for libraries.
Right.
This is like building the Linux kernel with all modules configured, or
building Emacs with support for both console and X
Thomas,
First and easy answer: it is open source, so anyone can recompile. So,
what's the issue?
Without a concept of stable interfaces, it will be difficult to
package and distribute RTE libraries, PMD, and DPDK applications. Right
now, the obvious path would include packaging the PMD bits t
Hi Thomas,
On 29/01/2014 09:15, Thomas Graf wrote:
> The obvious and usual best practise would be for DPDK to guarantee
> ABI stability between minor releases.
>
> Since dpdk-dev is copied as well, any comments?
DPDK's ABIs are not Kernel's ABIs, they are not POSIX, there is no
standard. Curre
Hi Pravin,
>> Few feature questions:
- what's about the vNIC supports (toward the guests)?
- what's about IPsec support (VxLAN over IPsec for instance)?
I do not understand how your patch will solve those 2 cases.
At this point I wanted to get basic DPDK support in OVS, once that is
done
Hi Pravin,
Yes, it is a good integration with http://dpdk.org
Few feature questions:
- what's about the vNIC supports (toward the guests)?
- what's about IPsec support (VxLAN over IPsec for instance)?
I do not understand how your patch will solve those 2 cases.
This is based a patch from G
