[dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/6] remove pci driver from vdevs
bernard.iremonger at intel.com
Mon Aug 31 12:23:33 CEST 2015
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John W. Linville [mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 6:52 PM
> To: Iremonger, Bernard
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/6] remove pci driver from vdevs
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 08:15:47AM +0000, Iremonger, Bernard wrote:
> > Hi John,
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John W. Linville [mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 6:44 PM
> > > To: Iremonger, Bernard
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/6] remove pci driver from vdevs
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 04:40:35PM +0100, Bernard Iremonger wrote:
> > > > There is a dummy pci driver in the vdev PMD's at present.
> > > > This RFC proposes to remove the pci driver from the vdev PMD's.
> > > > Changes have been made to librte_ether to handle vdevs which do
> > > > not
> > > have a pci driver.
> > > >
> > > > The pdev PMD's should work as before with the changes to
> > > > librte_ether The vdev PMD's which still have a pci driver should
> > > > work as before with the
> > > librte_ether changes.
> > > >
> > > > The following vdev PMD's have had the pci driver removed
> > > >
> > > > bonding PMD
> > > > null PMD
> > > > pcap PMD
> > > > ring PMD
> > >
> > > Any reason there is no patch for the af_packet driver?
> > >
> > > John
> > I have just modified the Intel vdev PMD's.
> > It would be best if the owners of the non Intel vdev's submitted patches
> for their drivers.
> What constitutes an "Intel vdev PMD"? I thought these were all part of the
> DPDK project? It seems odd to me for you to pick and choose like this.
I should probably have written vdev PMD's contributed by Intel.
I am not familiar with the other vdev PMD's and thought it best that they should be modified by their owners/maintainers if required.
> What is the overall purpose of this RFC?
The purpose of this RFC is to remove the need for a PCI device driver from Vdev's that that do not use a PCI driver. Removing the PCI driver is implemented in the ethdev changes. I have modified some of the Vdev's to verify that the ethdev changes work.
> What benefit accrues to those vdev
> PMDs that implement this change? What penalty is imposed on those that
> do not change?
6Wind have decided that only cleanup patches will be allowed in future for Vdevs that have a dummy PCI driver. Any change in functionality for these Vdevs will not be allowed.
Please see email below from 6Wind
> John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
> linville at tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
More information about the dev