[RFC] graph/node: feedback and future improvements
Robin Jarry
rjarry at redhat.com
Wed Apr 24 15:24:08 CEST 2024
Robin Jarry, Apr 14, 2024 at 12:35:
> Jerin Jacob, Apr 06, 2024 at 01:11:
> > Great.
> >
> > You may consider improving and/or adding inbuilt nodes for generic
> > protocol processing. Furthermore, consider contributing on app/graph.
> > I think, most likely, you should be able to leverage app/graph.
>
> Thanks! I am definitely planning to upstream nodes into DPDK as much as
> possible. I still need to determine what is the correct level of data
> path node public API so that the nodes can be agnostic of the control
> plane implementation.
Hey Jerin,
while working on ARP support [1], I noticed that we need to have
configurability of nodes (or set of nodes to be more precise) from the
outside. But the nodes in the set also need to specify metadata that
they expect from other nodes to store in mbufs.
For now, I have used a single dynamic field which I repurpose for every
node set depending on the use case [2]. However this raises a question:
how can we make it generic (and agnostic to the application) before
inclusion in lib/node?
I would be glad to have your opinion on the subject.
Cheers!
[1] https://github.com/rjarry/brouter/commit/e05246f51b736821b6689d40
[2] https://github.com/rjarry/brouter/blob/main/modules/infra/datapath/br_mbuf.h
More information about the dev
mailing list