[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] lpm: increase number of next hops for lpm (ipv4)
Bruce Richardson
bruce.richardson at intel.com
Fri Oct 23 16:38:54 CEST 2015
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:51:49PM +0200, Michal Jastrzebski wrote:
> From: Michal Kobylinski <michalx.kobylinski at intel.com>
>
> Main implementation - changes to lpm library regarding new data types.
> Additionally this patch implements changes required by test application.
> ABI versioning requirements are met only for lpm library,
> for table library it will be sent in v2 of this patch-set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Kobylinski <michalx.kobylinski at intel.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c | 4 +-
> app/test/test_lpm.c | 227 +++++-----
> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 887 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h | 295 +++++++++++-
> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm_version.map | 59 ++-
> lib/librte_table/rte_table_lpm.c | 10 +-
> 6 files changed, 1322 insertions(+), 160 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c b/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c
> index dbecc52..331ab29 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c
> @@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static void
> lpm_clean(unsigned lcore_id)
> {
> char lpm_name[MAX_STRING_SIZE];
> - struct rte_lpm *lpm;
> + struct rte_lpm_extend *lpm;
I thought this patchset was just to increase the size of the lpm entries, not
to create a whole new entry type? The structure names etc. should all stay the
same, and let the ABI versionning take care of handling code using the older
structures.
/Bruce
More information about the dev
mailing list