19/08/2019 17:56, Greg O'Rawe:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the reply. Is such a patch to the bonding PMD feasible?
Probably yes.
You can try to do it, and work with Chas for help.
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. Is such a patch to the bonding PMD feasible?
Thanks
Greg
This message, including attachments, is CONFIDENTIAL. It may also be privileged
or otherwise protected by law. If you received this email by mistake please let
us know by reply and then delete it from your
+Cc Chas, the maintainer of the bonding PMD
10/08/2019 18:42, Thomas Monjalon:
> Hi,
>
> 08/08/2019 18:28, Greg O'Rawe:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using DPDK 17.11.5 to bond two interfaces via the vdev syntax, however
> > the two interfaces are on the same NIC and share the same PCI address.
> >
> >
Hi,
08/08/2019 18:28, Greg O'Rawe:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using DPDK 17.11.5 to bond two interfaces via the vdev syntax, however
> the two interfaces are on the same NIC and share the same PCI address.
>
> Is there a way to reference them using the devargs syntax by MAC address? It
> is discussed here
Hi,
I'm using DPDK 17.11.5 to bond two interfaces via the vdev syntax, however the
two interfaces are on the same NIC and share the same PCI address.
Is there a way to reference them using the devargs syntax by MAC address? It is
discussed here https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/33808/
E.g.
