From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA2675323 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 22:06:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s56K6L8R032164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 6 Jun 2014 16:06:21 -0400 Received: from x220.localdomain ([10.3.113.19]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id s56K6Koj000457; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 16:06:21 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:06:20 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: "John W. Linville" Message-ID: <20140606200620.GU16092@x220.localdomain> References: <1402082754-12921-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <20140606194748.GT16092@x220.localdomain> <20140606195706.GB13595@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140606195706.GB13595@tuxdriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21+63 (2f2ebc24920d) (2011-07-01) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] librte_pmd_packet: add PMD for AF_PACKET-based virtual devices X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 20:06:09 -0000 * John W. Linville (linville@tuxdriver.com) wrote: > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 12:47:48PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > * John W. Linville (linville@tuxdriver.com) wrote: > > > This is a Linux-specific virtual PMD driver backed by an AF_PACKET > > > socket. The current implementation uses mmap'ed ring buffers to > > > limit copying and user/kernel transitions. The intent is also to take > > > advantage of fanout and any future AF_PACKET optimizations as well. > > > > > > This is intended to provide a means for using DPDK on a broad range > > > of hardware without hardware-specifi PMDs and hopefully with better > > > performance than what PCAP offers in Linux. This might be useful > > > as a development platform for DPDK applications when DPDK-supported > > > hardware is expensive or unavailable. > > > > Nice, have you compared yet w/ PCAP numbers? > > No, sorry -- definitely needs more testing, including performance numbers... No worries, just curious ;)