From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECABBA0A0E; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:19:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B586D410E0; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:19:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new2-smtp.messagingengine.com (new2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.224]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9588D40147 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:19:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4195E5811E1; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 07:19:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 28 Apr 2021 07:19:34 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= XaqAJVjVa8UcjQzBgWNRwkd8P7S1NqcnvwUuw5is+Ng=; b=FZPtcWhuJVT+h6HX /EtHYXnZSZ8FWVPDczvkinrPP6DAbT/XWYz5NpRcImD3x5PYvS3onxuJa3K419e4 9rYU+nJGbJ5UKxKn+MnuwZXvvjBjngausrUngbFy1RzxewYXRWVSd0/pT7uzezWZ S8JYKhPkWh01kz9jhE8sDqWj2KOaKwLUOyRbtkVfThlB+ObyfYsS4b+VoMUeC8fX OBwGwY2T1WbeOCSy6IhOOVGKwco8OwKH4wGDPtrRiJfU+WX9kzD55kJwdGcAf3MT 8WyQJ0yTk7g8GhnGpFgU2FOyXEKafCx4Anj9eW0+bE3AdklLyGISo0Lioq+Zpe86 r/dBKg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=XaqAJVjVa8UcjQzBgWNRwkd8P7S1NqcnvwUuw5is+ Ng=; b=QGMhIX8WfEOKq+VovmHoaUr1Y+jlzRuTaiENz8w0kOCKqyZ53aCy0AXbb qOQqG3c+seFBUPBweNa716u+tGQFIdELB2zEi4CSfe7tKeHovCR72LreIsUoW+uz VAMc2/P/t8lAwoSLWoBGQVhM6eTcAS1s2B5FlLmTmoP7b+3W0C3QfJwkGosVxclS 8aXvh9C8O0ZKLXQmqO+S6QgOuj0fSp1Aq+uKL4H2dW269dN2MOPzAJYrrH7h6WTA a4MyvUmTe10u5wRvgdAcz9/Fx+37buk3fFEFbmVOF8P51s0FlLw7k703HSXqVS+s VTNQEwYbOrgs4dUeWISPjmnqkUopg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvddvvddgudegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtqhertddttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepkeethedtieevhfeigeejleegudefjeehkeekteeuveeiuedvveeu tdejveehveetnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 07:19:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson , =?utf-8?B?U3RhbmlzxYJhdw==?= Kardach Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , Stephen Hemminger , Jerin Jacob , Kathleen Capella , "dev@dpdk.org" , Dharmik Thakkar , Ruifeng Wang , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , Stephen Hemminger , nd Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:19:30 +0200 Message-ID: <19515554.fk0Syz9kx9@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] L3fwd mode in testpmd X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 28/04/2021 13:04, Stanis=C5=82aw Kardach: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:48 PM Bruce Richardson < > bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote: > >=20 > > > I do not suggest pulling all these in. In our case, I see that the ask > > is only on LPM. I am open to hearing what others see as the requirement. > > > > > I think fib is the planned long-term replacement for lpm, and implements > > the same algorithm, so I think first versions should use it. >=20 > If I may add my 2 cents. If a decision is made to implement any FIB/LPM > logic in testpmd, it would be great if a vector-only approach that is used > in l3fwd could be avoided. > While working on RISC-V port I had to disable l3fwd compilation for RISC-V > as it requires a vector engine (in l3fwd_em.c). The board I'm currently > using has rv64gc ISA which does not have vector extensions and I use > testpmd extensively for verification, hence it would be a shame to lose i= t. Good point. That's why an example is not a test application, they have different goals.