Re: [PATCH v2] ip_frag: add IPv4 fragment copy packet API

[Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>]

Hi Huichao,


> 
>      I've been busy lately, sorry to reply to you late.

No worries at all.

> 
>> Instead of implicitly assuming that output mbufs will be allocated
> 
>> from pkt_in pool, it would be better to have output_pool as explicit
>> parameter for that function.
>> In a same way we have it for rte_ipv4_fragment_packet().
> 
>> If I understand correctly, here you assume that out_pkt will always
>> be big enough to hold entire fragment, right?
>> But that can not always be the case and probably we shouldn't assume
>> that for generic function.
>> I suppose safest way would be either use rte_pktmbuf_copy() here
>> directly or do something similar to what that function doing ourselves here.
> 
> reply: Thanks for the reminder, I will use explicit parameters and rte_pktmbuf_copy();
>> Forgot to mention, new API has to be experimental.
> 
> reply: Does this mean adding _rte_experimental when declaring a function?
> 

Yes, I meant _rte_experimental tag.
Thanks
Konstantin