From: "Jastrzebski, MichalX K" <michalx.k.jastrzebski@intel.com>
To: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>,
"Kobylinski, MichalX" <michalx.kobylinski@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/3] lpm: increase number of next hops for lpm (ipv4)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 12:13:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60ABE07DBB3A454EB7FAD707B4BB1582139CCC19@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <562B209A.6030507@mhcomputing.net>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Hall [mailto:mhall@mhcomputing.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2015 8:10 AM
> To: Jastrzebski, MichalX K; Kobylinski, MichalX
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/3] lpm: increase number of next hops
> for lpm (ipv4)
>
> On 10/23/15 9:20 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:51:48PM +0200, Michal Jastrzebski wrote:
> >> From: Michal Kobylinski <michalx.kobylinski@intel.com>
> >>
> >> The current DPDK implementation for LPM for IPv4 and IPv6 limits the
> >> number of next hops to 256, as the next hop ID is an 8-bit long field.
> >> Proposed extension increase number of next hops for IPv4 to 2^24 and
> >> also allows 32-bits read/write operations.
> >>
> >> This patchset requires additional change to rte_table library to meet
> >> ABI compatibility requirements. A v2 will be sent next week.
> >
> > I also have a patchset for this.
> >
> > I will send it out as well so we could compare.
> >
> > Matthew.
>
> Sorry about the delay; I only work on DPDK in personal time and not as
> part of a job. My patchset is attached to this email.
>
> One possible advantage with my patchset, compared to others, is that the
> space problem is fixed in both IPV4 and in IPV6, to prevent asymmetry
> between these two standards, which is something I try to avoid as much
> as humanly possible.
>
> This is because my application code is green-field, so I absolutely
> don't want to put any ugly hacks or incompatibilities in this code if I
> can possibly avoid it.
>
> Otherwise, I am not necessarily as expert about rte_lpm as some of the
> full-time guys, but I think with four or five of us in the thread
> hammering out patches we will be able to create something amazing
> together and I am very very very very very happy about this.
>
> Matthew.
Hi Matthew,
Thank You for a patch-set.
I can't apply patch 0001-... , could You check it please?
I have the following error:
Checking patch lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h...
error: while searching for:
#endif
/** @internal bitmask with valid and ext_entry/valid_group fields set */
#define RTE_LPM_VALID_EXT_ENTRY_BITMASK 0x0300
/** Bitmask used to indicate successful lookup */
#define RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS 0x0100
#if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_LITTLE_ENDIAN
/** @internal Tbl24 entry structure. */
struct rte_lpm_tbl24_entry {
/* Stores Next hop or group index (i.e. gindex)into tbl8. */
union {
uint8_t next_hop;
uint8_t tbl8_gindex;
};
/* Using single uint8_t to store 3 values. */
uint8_t valid :1; /**< Validation flag. */
uint8_t ext_entry :1; /**< External entry. */
uint8_t depth :6; /**< Rule depth. */
};
/** @internal Tbl8 entry structure. */
struct rte_lpm_tbl8_entry {
uint8_t next_hop; /**< next hop. */
/* Using single uint8_t to store 3 values. */
uint8_t valid :1; /**< Validation flag. */
uint8_t valid_group :1; /**< Group validation flag. */
uint8_t depth :6; /**< Rule depth. */
};
#else
struct rte_lpm_tbl24_entry {
error: patch failed: lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h:82
error: lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h: patch does not apply
Best regards,
Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-26 12:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-23 13:51 Michal Jastrzebski
2015-10-23 13:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] " Michal Jastrzebski
2015-10-23 14:38 ` Bruce Richardson
2015-10-23 14:59 ` Jastrzebski, MichalX K
2015-10-23 13:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/3] examples: update of apps using librte_lpm (ipv4) Michal Jastrzebski
2015-10-23 13:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/3] doc: update release 2.2 after changes in librte_lpm Michal Jastrzebski
2015-10-23 14:21 ` Bruce Richardson
2015-10-23 14:33 ` Jastrzebski, MichalX K
2015-10-23 16:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/3] lpm: increase number of next hops for lpm (ipv4) Matthew Hall
2015-10-23 16:33 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-10-23 18:38 ` Matthew Hall
2015-10-23 19:13 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-10-23 19:59 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-10-24 6:09 ` Matthew Hall
2015-10-25 17:52 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
[not found] ` <20151026115519.GA7576@MKJASTRX-MOBL>
2015-10-26 11:57 ` Jastrzebski, MichalX K
2015-10-26 14:03 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-10-26 15:39 ` Michal Jastrzebski
2015-10-26 16:59 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-10-26 12:13 ` Jastrzebski, MichalX K [this message]
2015-10-26 18:40 ` Matthew Hall
2015-10-27 10:35 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-10-27 10:33 ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-10-30 7:17 ` Matthew Hall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=60ABE07DBB3A454EB7FAD707B4BB1582139CCC19@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=michalx.k.jastrzebski@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=mhall@mhcomputing.net \
--cc=michalx.kobylinski@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).