I've done a very detailed evaluation of this patch, and I've created a blogpost like report here: https://prototype-kernel.readthedocs.io/en/latest/blogposts/xdp25_eval_generic_xdp_tx.html I didn't evaluate the adjust_head part, so I hope Andy is still planning to validate that part? --Jesper On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 12:09:25 -0400 (EDT) David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This provides a generic SKB based non-optimized XDP path which is used > if either the driver lacks a specific XDP implementation, or the user > requests it via a new IFLA_XDP_FLAGS value named XDP_FLAGS_SKB_MODE. > > It is arguable that perhaps I should have required something like > this as part of the initial XDP feature merge. > > I believe this is critical for two reasons: > > 1) Accessibility. More people can play with XDP with less > dependencies. Yes I know we have XDP support in virtio_net, but > that just creates another depedency for learning how to use this > facility. > > I wrote this to make life easier for the XDP newbies. > > 2) As a model for what the expected semantics are. If there is a pure > generic core implementation, it serves as a semantic example for > driver folks adding XDP support. > > This is just a rough draft and is untested. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
|