From my understanding, what Maxim is proposing is closer to what I was
trying to achieve. The main differences of my proposal vs Maxim proposal
was:
- use a more "POSIX namespace" approach for naming resources (eg.
"/ipc/..." vs "ipc_..."
I see the names of pktio interfaces as platform specific so each
platform can use whatever syntax it wants.
Fair enough :).
- extend pktio to allow unidirectional communication to save HW resources
A slight tweak to the current packet_io API. Post a patch.
Will do.
An egress queue leads to a (transmit-only) pktio interface which then
can magically transport packet to another (receive-only) pktio
interface in another AS. That receive pktio interface uses a pool in
the AS to allocate packet buffers from. Received buffers can be put on
an ingress queue. So the application code just sees the queues, only
the main logic needs handle the "packet pipe" pktio interfaces.
Ha ok. Yes my idea was to use standard pktio mechanisms (so either
through queues or bursts API). We could provide helpers which setup
those pktio and just expose queues.
Thanks,
ben
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
