From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Hall Subject: Re: TCP/IP stack for DPDK Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 13:51:14 -0700 Message-ID: <20140909205114.GC11510@mhcomputing.net> References: <4a71bb41.1307.14857e341d5.Coremail.zimeiw@163.com> <20140909062016.GA7050@mhcomputing.net> <20140909065852.GB7240@mhcomputing.net> <20140909121659.GB11499@neva> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: Jim Thompson Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 08:00:32AM -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: > BPF JIT, or even pflua[1] should be straight-forward to put on top of D= PDK. =20 > (It=E2=80=99s straight-forward to do on top of netmap.) >=20 > jim The pflua guys made a user-space copy of Linux BPF JIT. I'm planning to u= se=20 that because it was almost as fast as pflua with a lot fewer usage headac= hes=20 and dependencies. I'm making an MIT licensed app... so it isn't an issue for me personally = if=20 there is some GPL2 Linux code present. I don't think anybody made a non-r= ump=20 version of the BSD one yet or I'd use that... I'm trying not to stray too= far=20 from the app's original purposes until it has some working features prese= nt. Until that time comes, I just started out with libpcap offline mode BPF f= or=20 development purposes because it's standard and already available, and all= ows=20 operations upon raw packet pointers with no issues at all. Matthew.