2015-08-04 17:12, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Qiu, Michael
> > Actually, l3fwd works fine with fm10k vf.
> >
> > I don't know what's the exact reason of l3fwd-vf still in DPDK,
> > at least we could make full support for vf in l3fwd instead of
Hi Thomas,
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 11:47 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: Qiu, Michael; Zhang, Helin; Liu, Yong; Cao, Waterman; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC
[mailto:thomas.monja...@6wind.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:30 AM
To: Zhang, Helin
Cc: dev at dpdk.org<mailto:dev at dpdk.org>; Wu, Jingjing
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
2015-07-14 14:50, Zhang, Helin:
From: Wu, Jingjing
Because VF multi-queu
day, August 3, 2015 9:55 AM
> > To: Zhang, Helin
> > Cc: Liu, Yong; Cao, Waterman; dev at dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
> >
> > Any news?
> > Can we remove it from version 2.1?
> >
> > 201
which is not so
> necessary.
> Thank you!
>
> Regards,
> Helin
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:30 AM
> > To: Zhang, Helin
> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org;
; Cc: Liu, Yong; Cao, Waterman; dev at dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>
> Any news?
> Can we remove it from version 2.1?
>
> 2015-07-22 14:51, Zhang, Helin:
> > Marvin/Waterman
> >
> > Could you help to
an
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>
> Marvin/Waterman
>
> Could you help to check if l3fwd is good enough for all cases (1g/10/40g, PF
> and VF, single queue/multiple queue)?
> We aim to remove l3fwd-vf to reduce an
Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:30 AM
> To: Zhang, Helin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>
> 2015-07-14 14:50, Zhang, Helin:
> > From: Wu, Jingjing
>
2015-07-14 14:50, Zhang, Helin:
> From: Wu, Jingjing
> > Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf.
> > Suggest to remove the l3fwd-vf example.
> Totally agree with this!
> But we need the confirmation from validation guys of that l3fwd works
> quite well on VF with all NICs
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:28 PM
> To: Jayakumar, Muthurajan
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>
> 201
Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf.
Suggest to remove the l3fwd-vf example.
Signed-off-by: jingjing.wu
---
doc/guides/sample_app_ug/index.rst |1 -
doc/guides/sample_app_ug/l3_forward_virtual.rst | 158
examples/l3fwd-vf/Makefile
> -Original Message-
> From: Wu, Jingjing
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 12:57 AM
> To: dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: Wu, Jingjing; Zhang, Helin; Xu, Qian Q
> Subject: [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>
> Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf.
> Suggest to remove
2015-07-14 08:20, Jayakumar, Muthurajan:
> Can you please share as what is the benefit of removing l3fwd-vf example?
> Customers have been using this very much.
> Please let me know what is the disadvantage of keeping l3fwd-vf.
What is the benefit of keeping an example which can be replaced?
...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jingjing Wu
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 12:57 AM
To: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf.
Suggest to remove the l3fwd-vf example.
Signed-off-by: jingjing.wu
---
doc/guides
14 matches
Mail list logo
