[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] i40evf: Report error if HW CRC strip is disabled for Linux PF hosts

[Zhang, Helin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topel, Bjorn
> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 12:55 PM
> To: Zhang, Helin; dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: david.marchand at 6wind.com; Wu, Jingjing
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] i40evf: Report error if HW CRC strip is disabled for
> Linux PF hosts
> 
> >> +     /* For Linux PF hosts, VF has no ability to disable HW CRC strip,
> >> +      * and is implicitly enabled by the PF.
> >> +      */
> >> +     if (!conf->rxmode.hw_strip_crc) {
> >> +             vf = I40EVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(dev->data->dev_private);
> >> +             if ((vf->version_major == I40E_VIRTCHNL_VERSION_MAJOR) &&
> >> +                 (vf->version_minor <= I40E_VIRTCHNL_VERSION_MINOR)) {
> >> +                     /* Peer is Linux PF host. */
> > Can you reword above comments?
> > It just means the host is not DPDK PF host driver, it could be Linux
> > driver, and possible others (e.g. FreeBSD, VMWARE?).
> 
> Sure, I'll reword it! The broader question, however, is this correct for non-
> Linux/non-DPDK PF drivers?
> For FreeBSD I'll dig into the code, but for VMWARE (and I'd assume Microsoft
> Windows) it'll be harder.
> 
> Do you have any insights on the behavior for the non-open i40e PF drivers?
> 
> From the documentation [1], it's unclear whether non-Linux/non-DPDK PF
> drivers are supported. My interpretation was that only DPDK and Linux PF
> hosts are supported for Fortville NICs.
I guess only DPDK is different, though I am not sure.
As all other NIC drivers were developped by the same organization.
Even assuming that FreeBSD supports both configuration, it will not be a problem,
as DPDK just doesn't support, and nothing wrong.

Thanks,
Helin

> 
> 
> Björn
> 
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/intel_vf.html