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 42690A034D; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 21:46:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A77441101; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 21:46:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qk1-f170.google.com (mail-qk1-f170.google.com [209.85.222.170]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396E840140 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 19:03:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qk1-f170.google.com with SMTP id bs32so2324078qkb.1 for ; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 10:03:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gID9fpcgicDLfZAxi4cA7jgSPIYprnmx4unuioBY2nI=; b=Fc+bb7UKUZEfD3HpeXfMluKRgstiXXGTD2jTvCL7Lsdtd0Qbi+FjNe95GscZQJC3Ii g8iW/9+c5ecVSSCDbJzU1Rv0tDfB+aY6vEeM1KwbWNhblL+96ADu/XvqcSaCQyJ2q/XL bmikOTVRKIVrFnGlQ5CAR7WWltRgvDZ7N6sCvfJ9ZUsrycnExfMIA0ZgTJFn5w6h+XeU 7B29nJDPpEwfWqKg04BEZJsR28cNeE1IKm2MPaXwRHjRqBfWiAhKF+TkMf4kBTaPgIsH 0KzZqKtN2haWludPiDzWw5Xvd1IX7vGQ1zhP6hbnIrcvXwZ7lEGv4zwCJzoQfgKoqziB LzwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gID9fpcgicDLfZAxi4cA7jgSPIYprnmx4unuioBY2nI=; b=Y5vy8I85oeei+i9Vm0oyGevvnzFly/n0grLOR+vQdOKK9oxearQb/KjomyV1HQNCWl AY5mElTYha0dS7RVJwMqO1KEOe94SDeZbBtmSo2wCGrx2/ZJgQfAtnjXwE1VijBhVodL y8sZbQRSs4/n2DTfH2Sijt80+gW3qM5PSkqwocFgFA4G5quuzzk61BSba6ptApkiRcJl wQqRxzkDVKC54Jt2UH0OpwR9tl45Pk/CUP5BN1VeEpN9/J9EkFBwlXgemjVU5KvwEu4j ZDgDzx+DZcPxiXEQqSZm04cdVErJ/awCMTrUDWaMaYxbKBy4Z8j0gTlTEv3CWmssdKb8 AD+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530JQgWCetjERO4v5SlusCi7ofSO0Dbyo9WgGncsldCUZ5T02MmS WgyC9CsiMMXqSuJ+sWRooo1Ojr73VGZ2tDaKmNd+74SL X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy4RVi/K5eKsLNOlDJebe7N2HSfNJaAMZqu2cMBhRb7l2s5FBBwBUDTxd6jBCH516F6+eAqPfiaOlj+RGN7Fnw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4727:: with SMTP id bs39mr1798670qkb.486.1644429804456; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 10:03:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ansar Kannankattil Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 23:33:13 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Can I use rte_pktmbuf_chain to chain multiple mbuffs for calling only single tx_eth_burst API To: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005a504305d799a6ad" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 Feb 2022 21:46:57 +0100 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 --0000000000005a504305d799a6ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi My intention is to decrease the number of rte_tx_eth_burst calls, I know that mentioning nb_pkts will result in sending multiple packets in a single call. But providing nb_pkts=1 and posting a head mbuff having number of mbuffs linked with it will results sending multiple packets If not, what is the use case of linking multiple mbuffs together --0000000000005a504305d799a6ad Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=C2=A0
My intention is to decrease the number of rte= _tx_eth_burst calls, I know that mentioning nb_pkts will result in sending = multiple packets in a single call.
But providing nb_pkts=3D1 and = posting a head mbuff having number of mbuffs=C2=A0linked with it will resul= ts sending multiple=C2=A0packets
If not, what is the use case of = linking multiple mbuffs=C2=A0together
--0000000000005a504305d799a6ad--