From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882A4593A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  5 Jan 2015 13:03:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27])
 by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2015 03:59:53 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,691,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="507539688"
Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.243.20.27])
 by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 05 Jan 2015 03:57:30 -0800
Received: by  (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 05 Jan 2015 12:03:03 +0025
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 12:03:03 +0000
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Tapio Tallgren <tapio.tallgren@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150105120302.GD13152@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <CAGeyXNd0gvMrB-pst=JvCeJdN4ut78X6Lf4nvZw+BEon7hRHSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJi57Q=d4yaL9xFf2TWLgFapjmVJzUak8nkPf5X2WXsn6cgULw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJi57Q=d4yaL9xFf2TWLgFapjmVJzUak8nkPf5X2WXsn6cgULw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Query on the modified rte_mbuf structure
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 12:03:22 -0000

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 08:58:01AM +0200, Tapio Tallgren wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am not sure if I understand the question correctly, but there was a
> change to the rte_mbuf structure with
> patch ea672a8b1655bbb44876d2550ff56f384968a43b. It got rid of the pkt
> member in rte_mbuf. Here is an example of how to fix it:
> 
> -               eth_hdr = (struct ether_hdr *) mb->pkt.data;
> +               eth_hdr = (struct ether_hdr *) mb->data;
> 
> Another way of answering your question is that it is "data" in rte_mbuf:
> 
> -       struct rte_pktmbuf pkt;
> +       /* valid for any segment */
> +       struct rte_mbuf *next;  /**< Next segment of scattered packet. */
> +       void* data;             /**< Start address of data in segment
> buffer. */
> +       uint16_t data_len;      /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Shankari Vaidyalingam <
> shankari.v2k6@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > I can see that in the recent releases of DPDK the rte_mbuf structure has
> > undergone some changes.
> > Would like to know which field in the rte_mbuf data structure holds the
> > exact payload of the received packet in the modified structure.
> >
> > Regards
> > Shankari
> >
> 
> 

Best way to get at the packet data is to use the rte_pktmbuf_mtod macro defined
in rte_mbuf.h. This macro should be always kept up-to-date to refer to the
packet data, irrespective of changes to the underlying data structure.

/Bruce