Prashant,
> Thanks for the feedback.
> Out of curiosity, what is the motivation of this contract about
> minimal length of chained buffer data -- surely, my case being in
> point, the chaining framework should not make any assumptions about
> how the user would use it.
There are lots of features
It is mainly about first segment. Majority of vpp code asumes that packet
headers are in the first segment. This is to prevent crashes due to headers
being split between 2.
—
Damjan
> On 08.09.2021., at 11:31, Prashant Upadhyaya wrote:
>
> Hi Damjan,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
> Out of
Hi Damjan,
Thanks for the feedback.
Out of curiosity, what is the motivation of this contract about
minimal length of chained buffer data -- surely, my case being in
point, the chaining framework should not make any assumptions about
how the user would use it.
Regards
-Prashant
On Tue, Sep 7, 20
—
Damjan
> On 06.09.2021., at 15:27, Prashant Upadhyaya wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am using VPP21.06
> In vlib_buffer_advance there is the following assert --
> ASSERT ((b->flags & VLIB_BUFFER_NEXT_PRESENT) == 0 ||
> b->current_length >= VLIB_BUFFER_MIN_CHAIN_SEG_SIZE);
>
> The above is
*Regards*,
Mrityunjay Kumar.
Mobile: +91 - 9731528504
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 6:57 PM Prashant Upadhyaya
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using VPP21.06
> In vlib_buffer_advance there is the following assert --
> ASSERT ((b->flags & VLIB_BUFFER_NEXT_PRESENT) == 0 ||
> b->current_length >= VLIB_B
