Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 2/2] linux-generic: classification: remove unused code

For this patch alone: Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 8 April 2016 at 00:23, Zoltan Kiss wrote: > This function is not referred. > > Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss > --- >

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 5/6] api: pktio: add checksum offload options

On 30 March 2016 at 14:59, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote: > /** > + * Packet output configuration options bit field > + * > + * Packet output configuration options listed in a bit field structure. > + */ > +typedef union odp_pktout_config_opt_t { > +

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 4/6] api: pktio: add classifier enable pktin_queue_param

On 29 March 2016 at 18:11, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* EXT Bala Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org] > *Sent:* Monday, March 28, 2016 12:34 PM > *To:* Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <pet

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 5/6] api: pktio: add checksum offload options

On 28 March 2016 at 19:14, Bill Fischofer <bill.fischo...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org > > wrote: > >> >> >> Regards, >> Bala >> >> On 24 March 2016 a

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 5/6] api: pktio: add checksum offload options

Regards, Bala On 24 March 2016 at 20:19, Petri Savolainen wrote: > Added options for selecting IP/UDP/TCP/SCTP checksum offload on > packet input and output. Packets with input checksum failure are > either dropped or reported with packet_has_l3/l4_error flags. > >

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 4/6] api: pktio: add classifier enable pktin_queue_param

On 24 March 2016 at 20:19, Petri Savolainen wrote: > Added explicit classifier enable option for pktin event > queues. Hashing and classification cannot be enabled at the > same time. Pktin_queue_config may create target queues for > classification or application may

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] linux-generic: tm: reduce byte range to prevent array overflow

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan Regards, Bala On 27 March 2016 at 01:57, Bill Fischofer wrote: > Resolve bug https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2120 by reducing > the random array guard by one to ensure that at least two bytes

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH] api: pktio: add odp_pktin_recv_tmo

Hi, odp_pktin_recv_tmo() function called with wait value equal to ODP_PKTIN_NO_WAIT is similar to odp_pktin_recv() function. Hence why cant we simply merge these two functions as a single one. odp_pktin_recv() functions looks redundant. Regards, Bala On 17 March 2016 at 19:37, Petri Savolainen

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCHv3] linux-generic:release memory during session destory

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 15 March 2016 at 18:39, balakrishna.garapati < balakrishna.garap...@linaro.org> wrote: > Signed-off-by: balakrishna.garapati > --- > platform/linux-generic/odp_crypto.c | 2 ++ > 1 file

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH] api: pktio: add odp_pktin_recv_tmo

for timeout. Regards, Bala > > > -Petri > > > > > > *From:* EXT Bala Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 4:32 PM > *To:* Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <petri.savolai...@nokia.com> > *Cc:* LNG ODP Mailman

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] linux-generic: dpdk: add packet classification support

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 18 March 2016 at 14:02, Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < matias@nokia.com> wrote: > Ping. > > > -Original Message- > > From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of > EXT Matias > > Elo > >

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] linux-generic: packet_flags: use accessors to modify eth and l2 flag

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan Regards, Bala On 11 March 2016 at 14:03, Zoltan Kiss wrote: > Ping > > On 03/03/16 03:05, Zoltan Kiss wrote: > >> This makes it possible for other implementations like ODP-DPDK to reuse >> classification

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 1/2] api: pktio: add recv from multiple queues with tmo

mentation to specify that priority is in the order of input queue in the array with '0' being highest priority. Regards, Bala > > > *From:* lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] *On Behalf Of *EXT > Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) > *Sent:* Friday, March 04, 2016 12:

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 1/2] api: pktio: add recv from multiple queues with tmo

On 4 March 2016 at 15:21, Petri Savolainen wrote: > Added odp_pktin_recv_mq_tmo() which allows application to > poll multiple input queues (interfaces) with single call. > The call includes timeout parameter which allows thread to > e.g. sleep while waiting for more

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv1] linux-generic:pktio:add an interface to support multi pool

l-No.2 > [800, 1600) Pool-No.3 > other Pool-No.4 > How can I create pair to implement this? > > > 在 2016/3/1 23:27, Bala Manoharan 写道: > > Hi, > > The above described use-case is implementable with the existing ODP > classification framework. >

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH v1] validation: classification: add test case for odp_cos_drop() function

Ping Regards, Bala On 18 February 2016 at 18:18, Balasubramanian Manoharan < bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > Fixes: https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2016 > > Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan > --- >

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT v6] doc: user-guide documentation for classification

Hi Maxim, Can you please merge this patch. Regards, Bala On 1 March 2016 at 08:53, Bill Fischofer wrote: > One small typo noted. Other than that: > > Reviewed-and-tested-by: Bill Fischofer > > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 7:16 AM,

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv1] linux-generic:pktio:add an interface to support multi pool

Hi, The above described use-case is implementable with the existing ODP classification framework. Few points to take note for implementing this use-case * Each CoS has an associated pool from which packets arriving at this CoS is allocated. * There is an existing PMR rule ODP_PMR_LEN which

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT v3] doc: user-guide documentation for classification

Hi Christophe, I have merged the changes you had proposed and have sent an updated version. I have also added your signed-off to the new version as discussed. Regards, Bala On 29 February 2016 at 13:25, Christophe Milard < christophe.mil...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Bala. Just sent you a patch

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] Provide a generic function to invalidate a queue.

Regards, Bala On 26 February 2016 at 12:41, José Pekkarinen wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > And this is what we want, to have more flexibility to set this to > invalid, > > > > as the only way to do a pure assignation to ODP_QUEUE_INVALID for > unions > > > > is > > > >

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] Provide a generic function to invalidate a queue.

Regards, Bala On 26 February 2016 at 11:51, José Pekkarinen wrote: > On Thursday 25 February 2016 15:01:11 EXT Bill Fischofer wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:39 PM, José Pekkarinen < > jose.pekkari...@nokia.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday 25

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT v3] doc: user-guide documentation for classification

On 25 February 2016 at 18:14, Christophe Milard < christophe.mil...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 25 February 2016 at 09:56, Balasubramanian Manoharan < > bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan >> --- >> v3: Incorporates

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] Provide a generic function to invalidate a queue.

On 22 February 2016 at 18:04, José Pekkarinen wrote: > To provide support of different definitions of odp_queue_t > it's good to have a proper mechanism to set the queue invalid > in case any error during the transmission happen. > What is the expectation from the

Re: [lng-odp] crypto contexts

ists.linaro.org] *On Behalf Of *Gábor > Sándor Enyedi > *Sent:* Thursday, February 18, 2016 1:58 PM > *To:* Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> > *Cc:* lng-odp@lists.linaro.org > *Subject:* Re: [lng-odp] crypto contexts > > > > OK, so back to the original q

Re: [lng-odp] crypto contexts

gt; > On 17 February 2016 at 21:11, Gábor Sándor Enyedi < > gabor.sandor.eny...@ericsson.com> wrote: > >> How can you change the crypto key? Each user has its own. >> >> Gabor >> >> >> On 02/17/2016 12:13 PM, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >&g

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 1/4] api: crypto: add odp_crypto_capability() api

For the series: Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan Regards, Bala On 18 February 2016 at 01:07, Bill Fischofer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer > --- > include/odp/api/spec/crypto.h | 18

Re: [lng-odp] crypto contexts

user has its own. > > Gabor > > > On 02/17/2016 12:13 PM, Bala Manoharan wrote: > > Hi, > > There is no need to create a crypto session for each packet. The > application needs to create a crypto session for a unique cipher/auth key > (ie all the parameters in

Re: [lng-odp] crypto contexts

Hi, There is no need to create a crypto session for each packet. The application needs to create a crypto session for a unique cipher/auth key (ie all the parameters in odp_crypto_session_params_t ). A crypto session is created so that application can create a crypto session and reuse it for

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH] doc: user-guide documentation for classification

Hi, On 15 February 2016 at 20:52, Christophe Milard < christophe.mil...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 15 February 2016 at 15:12, Balasubramanian Manoharan < > bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> Adds user-guide documentation for classification module >> >> Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 2/4] helper: ip: added ipv4 address parse

return either the number of prefix bits … > > > > // String format xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/yy > > int odph_ipv4_subnet_parse(uint32_t *ip_addr, unsigned *prefix_bits, const > char *str); > > > > … the mask. > > > > int odph_ipv4_subnet_parse(uint32_t *ip_addr, uint32_t

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 2/4] helper: ip: added ipv4 address parse

IMO, it is better to add feature for parsing the subnet mask for ipv4 address in the same function. We can add the string format in CIDR notation as "xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/yy" where yy is subnet prefix. The mask will be filled as a uint32_t same as in ipv4 address. syntax will be something like

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv3 3/4] validation: classification: adds validation suite for pmr create api

Thanks Bill. Looks like the latest merge in api-next has created conflict in my patch. I will rebase to HEAD and post V4. Regards, Bala On 3 February 2016 at 21:37, Bill Fischofer wrote: > Part 3 of this patch fails to apply to the head of api-next for me: > >

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv4 0/4] add PMR create API

My mistake. I am sending v5 shortly. Regards, Bala On 3 February 2016 at 22:51, Bill Fischofer wrote: > This now applies and runs, however there are doxygen issues: > > bill@Ubuntu15:~/linaro/balapmr$ make doxygen-html > rm -rf doc/output > make

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv4 0/4] add PMR create API

New version sent. Thanks for such quick reviews Bill. :) Regards, Bala On 3 February 2016 at 23:12, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > My mistake. I am sending v5 shortly. > > Regards, > Bala > > > On 3 February 2016 at 22:51, Bill Fischofer <bi

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv2 1/4] api: classification: add pmr create api

Regards, Bala On 2 February 2016 at 14:53, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: EXT Balasubramanian Manoharan [mailto:bala.manoha...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 2:56 PM >> To:

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv1 0/2] linux-generic:classification:add a new pmr term to support Range Match

Packet matching rule to support the range was previously available in ODP as part of pmr create function but the same was removed after discussion since most of the existing HWs were not able to support the range function. We can add this point to the ODP public call to have a detailed discussion

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv1 1/4] api: classification: add pmr create api

Okay. I will incorporate these changes in the next version. Regards, Bala On 28 January 2016 at 20:31, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > This is otherwise OK (and exactly the feature I was missing in the call > yesterday), but I'm wondering the

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT 2/4] linux-generic: separate MIPS ODP_CACHE_LINE_SIZE to its arch file

On 29 January 2016 at 15:40, Hongbo Zhang wrote: > On 29 January 2016 at 17:10, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) > wrote: >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of EXT >>>

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv1 1/4] api: classification: add pmr create api

Ping. Any feedback on the API definition and comments most welcome. Regards, Bala On 26 January 2016 at 06:37, Bill Fischofer wrote: > The question of contexts for stateful classification was discussed last > July. We can discuss this further during tomorrow's

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] linux-generic: pool: catch duplicate free errors in debug builds

Just read the discussion in other thread. Seems reasonable For the series: Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> Regards, Bala On 25 January 2016 at 10:56, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > Just curious does this issue not happe

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] linux-generic: pool: catch duplicate free errors in debug builds

Just curious does this issue not happen in production build? Regards, Bala On 5 November 2015 at 23:32, Bill Fischofer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Bill Fischofer > --- > platform/linux-generic/odp_pool.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] linux-generic: packet: hide frame_len behind accessor

I was directly accessing this value to avoid a function call. If required you can use the existing ODP API odp_packet_len() which returns the total length. Maybe you can move this as an inline function. code snippet from odp_packet.c === uint32_t odp_packet_len(odp_packet_t pkt) {

Re: [lng-odp] ODP IPSEC example application optimizations

Hi Nikhil, These changes are acceptable and please provide your patch to the list. Also IMO we can keep it as configurable in the example so that if someone wants to use AH for authentication he can use the existing code. Regards, Bala On 19 January 2016 at 17:17, Nikhil Agarwal

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] linux-generic: pktio: support multiple loop interfaces

The "loop" as a keyword for loop interface was useful to test validation suite since it needed only one interface but if we need multiple loopback interface then I wouldn't suggest using "loopX" keyword but a different mechanism to set an interface as loop. I believe most platforms will be able

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH v2 0/3] validation: cls: correct tests a little

For the series: Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan Regards, Bala On 15 January 2016 at 22:58, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > This patch series corrects classification tests to be a little bit > adoptive. > > Since v1: > - removed patch for

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 5/5] validation: cls: split pmr chain test

at 13:26, Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 14.01.16 07:55, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> The idea behind this suite is to have a mechanism to test the >> behaviour of the system after applying all the different PMR, default >> CoS, e

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 3/5] validation: cls: test_pmr: don't create default input queue

<ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 14.01.16 07:52, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> This patch does not apply maybe you need to rebase to HEAD. >> >> Regards, >> Bala >> Regards, >> Bala >> > I will re-base, but this patch still has ques

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 4/5] validation: cls: use correct MAC addresses

Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 14.01.16 07:59, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> The idea of having to create pktio in each and every test case is to >> create robustness in test cases and have them as independent from each >> other as possible.

Re: [lng-odp] [RFC PATCH] api: packet_io: return headroom when set new one

Maximum headroom is defined in ODP_PACKET_MAX_HEADROOM and is an implementation specific value and will not be greater than uint32/2. Having said that the current definition of headroom in ODP is that it will not exceed a single segment meaning the headroom will NOT overflow by adding an empty

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 5/5] validation: cls: split pmr chain test

The idea behind this suite is to have a mechanism to test the behaviour of the system after applying all the different PMR, default CoS, error CoS and L2 and L3 CoS values. your suggested changes tests each and every configuration individually which defeats the idea of the suite. There is a

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 3/5] validation: cls: test_pmr: don't create default input queue

This patch does not apply maybe you need to rebase to HEAD. Regards, Bala Regards, Bala On 12 January 2016 at 23:41, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > There is no need to create default input queue for pktio if > default CoS is assigned. > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 0/5] validation: cls: correct tests a little

Hi Ivan, It would be better if you can send this patch on API-NEXT branch as I said before I am working on API proposal to modify odp_pmr_create() function syntax and it would be easy if we could modify your changes to API-NEXT and then we can move it to master branch. The patch 3 in your series

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 4/5] validation: cls: use correct MAC addresses

The idea of having to create pktio in each and every test case is to create robustness in test cases and have them as independent from each other as possible. In classification when you remove a CoS rule it is not expected to see the changes immediately some systems will have latency and the

[lng-odp] API-NEXT branch is broken

Hi, The api-next branch is broken after merge from master. convert atomic_queue.svg atomic_queue.png /bin/bash: convert: command not found make[2]: *** [atomic_queue.png] Error 127 Regards, Bala ___ lng-odp mailing list lng-odp@lists.linaro.org

Re: [lng-odp] [RFC API-NEXT PATCH] api: packet: add packet segment manipulation

Hi, On 11 January 2016 at 19:17, Petri Savolainen wrote: > Packet segments can be allocated/freed/multi-referenced. > Segments data pointer and length can be modified (push/pull). > Segments can be linked to packets when needed (can exist also > when not connected to

Re: [lng-odp] [RFC API-NEXT PATCH] Packet References and Composites

This patch series could be split into two different parts as Reference and Composite since IMO the Referencing part is straight forward and might not need much discussion and could be be accepted sooner. Regarding the concept of composite packets it would be appreciable to provide some use-cases

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv2] api: packet: add detailed packet error flags

Hi Mike, Thanks for Merging the patch. I will send them soon. Regards, Bala Regards, Bala On 6 January 2016 at 18:53, Mike Holmes wrote: > Merged. > > Bala, are you planning on sending validation tests and user-guide > documentation shortly or should we generate a

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] validation: classification: remove double frees

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan Regards, Bala On 6 January 2016 at 23:04, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin > --- > test/validation/classification/odp_classification_test_pmr.c |

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 3/6] validation: classification: add class of service create api

I will correct this as a separate patch. Regards, Bala On 17 December 2015 at 15:48, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > . > >>> + >>> +pkt = receive_packet(, ODP_TIME_SEC_IN_NS); >> >> here has to be time of scheduler, ns should be converted to with >>

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 1/6] api: classification: add class of serivce create api

From: EXT Bill Fischofer [mailto:bill.fischo...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 1:54 PM >> >> >> To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) >> Cc: Bala Manoharan; LNG ODP Mailman List >> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 1/6] api: classification: add >&g

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 1/6] api: classification: add class of serivce create api

to split this into multiple patches for review convenience that's > fine. I'd just like to be sure that we don't have a series of API breaks for > 1.6, 1.7, etc. Best to do that all at once on a release boundary. > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoh

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 1/6] api: classification: add class of serivce create api

ave a series of API >> breaks for 1.6, 1.7, etc. Best to do that all at once on a release >> boundary. >> >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Bala Manoharan >> <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 17 December 2015 at 17:31, Bill Fischo

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 5/6] api: classification: rename odp_drop_e to odp_cls_drop_t

Hi, On 17 December 2015 at 08:54, Bill Fischofer wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 3:28 AM, Balasubramanian Manoharan > wrote: >> >> Changes drop policy enum name from odp_drop_e to odp_cls_drop_t >> >> Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv2 1/6] api: classification: add class of serivce create api

The reason for having odp_cls_xxx is that class of service module contains class of service and packet matching rule and we need a common syntax to identify the module hence odp_cls_xxx is used as common prefix. I agree all the functions in classifier module needs to be changed to add the prefix

Re: [lng-odp] [HELP] Question about API Classification and Traffic Manager

Hi, On 16 December 2015 at 20:22, Kury Nicolas wrote: > Hi! > > I have some questions about Traffic Manager and Classifier. > > Traffic Manager: > I see there is the possibility to send back the packets. Do you have any > example where this would be used ? I don't

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] api: packet: add detailed packet error api

PIng On 17 November 2015 at 12:36, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote: > Adds api to get packet error flags for L2, L3 and L4 errors. > > Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan > --- > include/odp/api/packet_flags.h| 33 >

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv1 1/4] api: classification: add class of serivce create api

Ping. On 8 December 2015 at 15:51, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote: > class of service create function now takes pool, queue, drop policy and > name as input parameters. > Adds class of service parameter structure odp_cls_cos_param_t and > initialization function

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] example: classifier: fix add queue param init call

It is fine from my side. Regards, Bala On 11 December 2015 at 14:56, Maxim Uvarov wrote: > Ok, you added that init() inside that commit of api-next: > > commit 8da0ee0b2a43bfdd5b0d37d2d2a10a45bbf2d7bd > Author: Balasubramanian Manoharan >

Re: [lng-odp] ODP_CLASSIFIER and ODP_GENERATOR failing in master branch

rrun on timer pool "timer_pool", timer resolution too high odp_timer.c:641:timer_notify(): Regards, Bala On 11 December 2015 at 12:12, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Maxim, > > I just tested it again and I am seeing the same behaviour I explained

Re: [lng-odp] [HELP] odp_classification no match ?

ls provide IP address format in hexadecimal. >>For eg "10.10.10.1" ==> "A.A.A.1". > > Thank you it works! But I still have no match with ODP_PMR_UDP_DPORT=1234 > even if I use the hexadecimal notation 4D2 or 04D2. > > > ___

Re: [lng-odp] [HELP] odp_classification no match ?

Looks like a previous commit has changed the Ip address format As a work around pls provide IP address format in hexadecimal. For eg "10.10.10.1" ==> "A.A.A.1". Pls assign the bug to me. Regards, Bala On 10 December 2015 at 18:28, Bill Fischofer wrote: > Please open

Re: [lng-odp] ODP_CLASSIFIER and ODP_GENERATOR failing in master branch

ier.c:304 >> #9 0x0042900b in odp_run_start_routine (arg=0x6954e0) at >> linux.c:36 >> #10 0x773a3182 in start_thread (arg=0x74a91700) at >> pthread_create.c:312 >> #11 0x770d047d in clone () at >> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64

Re: [lng-odp] ODP_CLASSIFIER and ODP_GENERATOR failing in master branch

Not sure which was the commit. Maybe Bill can confirm the commit. Regards, Bala On 10 December 2015 at 19:55, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 12/10/2015 17:19, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> odp_classifier and odp_generator is failing

[lng-odp] ODP_CLASSIFIER and ODP_GENERATOR failing in master branch

Hi, odp_classifier and odp_generator is failing in the master branch but both are working in api-next branch. Looks like the issue in classifier is a bug is in the queue module which was fixed in api-next branch and this fix needs to be merged into master branch. Regards, Bala

Re: [lng-odp] ODP_CLASSIFIER and ODP_GENERATOR failing in master branch

odp_classifier runs on api-next branch but if we run on master it currently crashes during queue_enq function. I remember the crash was similar to the one we had during queue reorder implementation. Regards, Bala On 10 December 2015 at 20:38, Stuart Haslam wrote: > On

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv3 1/4] api: classification: add odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

I have sent V4 correcting the issues pointed above. Regards, Bala On 3 December 2015 at 14:49, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of EXT >> Balasubramanian

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv2 4/5] validation: classification: add odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

Yes. This issue was pointed out by Stuart as well. I will add detailed test case to test pool allocation with Cos. Regards, Bala On 30 November 2015 at 14:49, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > Hi, Bala > > I didn't look deep enough in this validation test but seems it doesn't

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH] api: pool: redefine packet user area init

Hi Petri, Comments inline... On 27 November 2015 at 19:52, Petri Savolainen wrote: > User area is either persistent or non-persistent. Init is > called only once for persistent user area. Init is additionally > called for non-persistent area when needed (when ODP

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv2 2/5] linux-generic: internal header file changes to support odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

only found in subsequent parts. > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> > wrote: >> >> Hi Bill, >> >> I just tried the build and it seems to work fine on the latest API-NEXT >> branch. >> >> Did you me

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv2 2/5] linux-generic: internal header file changes to support odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

Hi Bill, I just tried the build and it seems to work fine on the latest API-NEXT branch. Did you mean it is not working after applying only part 2 of the patch ignoring the rest? All the 5 patches are dependent on each other since the changes are across two modules classification and pktio. I

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 3/5] linux-generic: classification: implements odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

Hi, Pls find comments inline.. On 19 November 2015 at 16:24, Stuart Haslam wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:46:51AM +0530, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote: >> Adds support for configuring packet pool to a class-of-service. >> linux-generic packet parser is enhanced

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/5] api: classification: add odp_cls_cos_pool_set() api

Thanks for pointing out. Will update in the next version. Regards, Bala On 17 November 2015 at 18:46, Bill Fischofer wrote: > This should be marked API-NEXT. > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Balasubramanian Manoharan > wrote: >> >>

Re: [lng-odp] pktio selection

Hi, I went through the same issue as well.. In ODP we have defined that the dev-name is implementation specific and hence I like the idea to add socket type to dev-name something like "SOCKET_MMAP:eth0"/ "NETMAP: eth0" and this maps well with the ODP definition for device name. Regards, Bala On

Re: [lng-odp] pktio selection

Hi, I went through the same issue as well.. In ODP we have defined that the dev-name is implementation specific and hence I like the idea to add socket type to dev-name something like "SOCKET_MMAP:eth0"/ "NETMAP: eth0" and this maps well with the ODP definition for device name. Regards, Bala On

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 2/5] api: pktio: added multiple pktio input queues

y should be >> integrated into classification API. >> >> Alex >> >> >> On 9 November 2015 at 11:11, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) >> <petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> > -Original Messa

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 2/5] api: pktio: added multiple pktio input queues

inside classification. Regards, Bala On 9 November 2015 at 16:02, Alexandru Badicioiu <alexandru.badici...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 9 November 2015 at 12:26, Bala Manoharan <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> > wrote: >> >> The existing Classification infra structure s

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 2/5] api: pktio: added multiple pktio input queues

Hi Petri, Why don't we add this hash parameter to CoS so that when the packet arrives to a CoS it can be distributed based on the hash algorithm to a number of queues. Also if a system does not support Classification this hashing can be attached to the default CoS and in systems supporting

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH 1/2] api: version: added implementation name str

This method of identifying ODP version using API is useful for finding the implementation version while executing the binary. IMO we need to additionally define a method to identify the version of the compiled binary statically. We can add a "#define Version " inside the implementation file so

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCHv1] validation:classification: Add fix for classification tests

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 22 October 2015 at 18:11, wrote: > From: Grigore Ion > > odph_ipv4_csum_update should be used to update the checksum inside a pkt, > as it is used in all the other

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH] mergefix: example: classifier: fix duplicate merge lines

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 29 October 2015 at 16:38, Maxim Uvarov wrote: > Looks like merge to api-next, cherry-pick from api-next > and merge master to api-next produced duplicate patch lines. > Found that with inspecting

Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] example: classifier: use uint32_t instead of unsigned

Reviewed-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan On 26 October 2015 at 16:09, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: > Fixes build issue on arch where uint32_t != unsigned: > example/classifier/odp_classifier.c:694:8: error: > passing argument 3 of

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv1 4/4] validation: classificaiton: remove redundant sequence number check

onz...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 21.10.15 15:14, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> I skipped this coz this as I just realised that since this was an >> error packet and it might not be required for platforms to parse an >> error packet and hence I removed the sequence number check

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv1 4/4] validation: classificaiton: remove redundant sequence number check

I skipped this coz this as I just realised that since this was an error packet and it might not be required for platforms to parse an error packet and hence I removed the sequence number check for this packet and just checked whether this packet was received on error CoS queue. Regards, Bala On

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCH] validation: classification: structural code change

Hi Ivan, Agreed. Splitting can be done. Do you have any other comments apart from splitting? Regards, Bala On 20 October 2015 at 15:52, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > Hi, Bala > > Propose to split this on 4 patches for clarity and history reason: > > 1 - destroy_inq()

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv5] validation: classification: added additional suite to test individual PMRs

Hi Ivan, Comments inline. On 15 October 2015 at 19:58, Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronz...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 15.10.15 16:39, Bala Manoharan wrote: >> >> Hi Ivan, >> >> Thanks for pointing out the issues. Since this patch is merged I will >> cr

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCH 1/1] validation: classification: add odp_pktio_param_init() API

This patch needs to be merged after https://patches.linaro.org/54903/ Regards, Bala On 15 October 2015 at 11:45, Balasubramanian Manoharan wrote: > odp_pktio_param_init() API is used to initialize odp_pktio_param_t params > > Signed-off-by: Balasubramanian Manoharan

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv5] validation: classification: added additional suite to test individual PMRs

Hi Ivan, Thanks for pointing out the issues. Since this patch is merged I will create a bug and add the missing points. Pls provide your inputs on the comments. On 15 October 2015 at 16:53, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > Hi, Bala > > Just compared this version with

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCHv5] validation: classification: added additional suite to test individual PMRs

Hi Bill, Agreed. Maybe we can merge this patch and then I will send a separate patch to resolve the conflict so that both your patch and the conflict patch could be merged together. IMO, if this patch is acceptable we can merge this as it is now and then I can send a conflict resolution patch to

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCH v3] validation: classification: added additional suite to test individual PMRs

ober 2015 at 11:51, Balasubramanian Manoharan > <bala.manoha...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> Ping. >> >> On Thursday 01 October 2015 08:13 PM, Mike Holmes wrote: >> >> Thanks - I added a bug for each case >> >> On 1 October 2015 at 03:05, Bala M

Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT/PATCH v3] validation: classification: added additional suite to test individual PMRs

On 30 September 2015 at 21:34, Mike Holmes wrote: > > > On 24 September 2015 at 10:43, Balasubramanian Manoharan > wrote: >> >> Additional test suite is added to classification validation suite to test >> individual PMRs. This suite will test

<    1   2   3   4   5   >