On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Przemyslaw Lal wrote:
> On 18/05/2017 22:41, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> >On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 06:09:21PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
> >>
> >>On 4/4/17, 5:47 PM, "Darrell Ball" wrote:
> >>
> >> On 4/4/17, 3:09 AM, "Lal, PrzemyslawX"
On 18/05/2017 22:41, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 06:09:21PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
On 4/4/17, 5:47 PM, "Darrell Ball" wrote:
On 4/4/17, 3:09 AM, "Lal, PrzemyslawX" wrote:
On 04/04/2017 06:14,
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 06:09:21PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
>
>
> On 4/4/17, 5:47 PM, "Darrell Ball" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/4/17, 3:09 AM, "Lal, PrzemyslawX" wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2017 06:14, Darrell Ball wrote:
>
>
On 4/4/17, 3:09 AM, "Lal, PrzemyslawX" wrote:
On 04/04/2017 06:14, Darrell Ball wrote:
>
> On 4/3/17, 5:27 AM, "ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org on behalf of
Przemyslaw Lal"
On 04/04/2017 06:14, Darrell Ball wrote:
On 4/3/17, 5:27 AM, "ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org on behalf of Przemyslaw Lal"
wrote:
In current implementation port_id is used as an ifindex for all netdev-dpdk
On 4/3/17, 5:27 AM, "ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org on behalf of Przemyslaw
Lal"
wrote:
In current implementation port_id is used as an ifindex for all netdev-dpdk
interfaces.
For physical DPDK
In current implementation port_id is used as an ifindex for all netdev-dpdk
interfaces.
For physical DPDK interfaces using port_id as ifindex causes that '0' is set as
ifindex for 'dpdk0' interface, '1' for 'dpdk1' and so on. For the DPDK vHost
interfaces ifindexes are not even assigned (0 is