On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 17:32:16 -0800, Michael Chan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:50:54 -0500 (EST), David Miller wrote:
> >> We don't set precedence by one driver saying "hey it's better to do
> >> things this way, forget what all the othe
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:50:54 -0500 (EST), David Miller wrote:
>> We don't set precedence by one driver saying "hey it's better to do
>> things this way, forget what all the other drivers are doing." Rather
>> we have a "discussion" about wha
On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:50:54 -0500 (EST), David Miller wrote:
> We don't set precedence by one driver saying "hey it's better to do
> things this way, forget what all the other drivers are doing." Rather
> we have a "discussion" about what the appropriate thing is to do and
> convert all the drive
From: Tom Herbert
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:25:00 -0800
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 2:02 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Tom Herbert
>> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:58:56 -0800
>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Michael Chan
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -080
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 2:02 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Tom Herbert
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:58:56 -0800
>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Michael Chan
>>> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -0800
>>>
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Tom Herbert
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:58:56 -0800
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Michael Chan
>> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -0800
>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller wrote:
Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the u
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Michael Chan
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -0800
>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the user
>>> can modify.
>>>
>>> Treat it like any other common netdev
From: Michael Chan
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -0800
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>
>> Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the user
>> can modify.
>>
>> Treat it like any other common netdev feature a driver might
>> support such as checksum offloading o
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller wrote:
>
> Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the user
> can modify.
>
> Treat it like any other common netdev feature a driver might
> support such as checksum offloading or GRO.
>
David, I want to make sure I understand completely. Are
Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the user
can modify.
Treat it like any other common netdev feature a driver might
support such as checksum offloading or GRO.
Thanks.
The first 10 patches refactor the code (rx/tx code paths and ring logic)
and add the basic infrastructure to support XDP. The 11th patch adds
basic ndo_xdp to support XDP_DROP and XDP_PASS only. The 12th patch
completes the series with XDP_TX.
Thanks to Andy Gospodarek for testing and uncovering
11 matches
Mail list logo
