From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88AADC433F5
	for <dpdk-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:36:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9934840140;
	Thu, 10 Feb 2022 12:36:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF744013F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 12:36:53 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;
 d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel;
 t=1644493013; x=1676029013;
 h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:
 mime-version:in-reply-to;
 bh=Wkz3OTqp5vI++F0ie73XGtIjupZcE6rBPIDObof4CN0=;
 b=QuQw9kY47TKpx2+6/6UgQomls9jyd7eBhw+9pqsEDzeXeTRHnp817+oD
 PyPi8I0l+eTMN7836jB7b94Adg106su+GDEoIFYW56DArbquwXazAxLOH
 GTPJ8GbHd1hBHlJmu17yaskcpb97u3rLTBXjYfcppZQWo6Dd+p+CswkDm
 +93WpPgXOTTwEfze5osgzitTQJ4vP6je0jBWulp2pDHKDsniHrl4tEZMu
 OgAdEAUSKEwocXROZ3G6GshJbVhxzt/SFzFtn2osYc9cAnPDpMIyaeswU
 NrS+3BXM7JhV9IeucS3IqW+C569FZDJ05mvJVN1q7k1rtpWIbNN8hCE2G w==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10253"; a="229438441"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,358,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="229438441"
Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51])
 by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 10 Feb 2022 03:36:52 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,358,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="485652901"
Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.11.92])
 by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA;
 10 Feb 2022 03:36:50 -0800
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:36:47 +0000
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Ansar Kannankattil <ansarkannankat@gmail.com>
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: Can I use rte_pktmbuf_chain to chain multiple mbuffs for calling
 only single tx_eth_burst API
Message-ID: <YgT4z+7E+NtZ5ukt@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <CAPA_rBexb_JKhGtxp4uQ1M-5F0RXpvpOHxDCso5VxmjRxkL1eA@mail.gmail.com>
 <fa4dcbb4-00aa-8691-69a7-9de173d3698d@intel.com>
 <20220209144617.79834bd6@hermes.local>
 <7dccdaf8-10d0-69f2-2a91-791dde993cee@intel.com>
 <CAPA_rBcKPFkBomMRr0-dPuTEZi32Dp_rA-QaqN_KwUxsWErTJA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPA_rBcKPFkBomMRr0-dPuTEZi32Dp_rA-QaqN_KwUxsWErTJA@mail.gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 04:07:02PM +0530, Ansar Kannankattil wrote:
>    Thanks for the responses,
>    Then what is the advantage of chaining mbuffs over using the mbuff
>    array?
> 
They imply different things.
* An array of mbufs represents multiple packets.
* A chain of mbufs is a single packet.

Therefore, an array of three mbuf pointers always represents 3 packets.
Each one of the mbufs pointed to from that array may have multiple segments
i.e. chained via the next pointers, but that chain is still a single
packet.