From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA73368BB for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:13:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214] helo=[192.168.0.10]) by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WtyTX-0003RV-Px; Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:14:58 +0200 Message-ID: <5395A4F6.7050609@6wind.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:13:42 +0200 From: Olivier MATZ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cristian Dumitrescu References: <1401905319-8882-1-git-send-email-cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com> <1401905319-8882-23-git-send-email-cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com> <53957A4E.6090401@6wind.com> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891261B1C2354@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891261B1C2354@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [v2 22/23] Packet Framework IPv4 pipeline sample app 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: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 12:13:04 -0000 Hi Christian, > We need a message type defined for message passing between cores, and > pktmbuf is definitely not the right approach. Could you please explain why a pktmbuf is not the right approach? As proposed in http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-May/002759.html I think the control mbuf could be replaced by a packet mbuf or an application private structure. Regards, Olivier