[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vfio: remove deprecated DMA mapping functions

[Burakov, Anatoly]

On 06-Nov-19 1:50 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 06/11/2019 14:48, David Marchand:
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 2:23 PM Burakov, Anatoly
>> <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25-Oct-19 12:13 PM, Damjan Marion (damarion) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 25 Oct 2019, at 00:32, Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 24/10/2019 21:09, David Marchand:
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:18 PM Anatoly Burakov
>>>>>> <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The rte_vfio_dma_map/unmap API's have been marked as deprecated in
>>>>>>> release 19.05. Remove them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Notes:
>>>>>>>      Although `rte_vfio_dma_map` et al. was marked as deprecated in our documentation,
>>>>>>>      it wasn't marked as __rte_deprecated in code. Should we still remove it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can see that vpp is still using this api.
>>>>>> I would prefer we get some ack from their side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shahaf?
>>>>>> Ray?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you guys have contact with VPP devs?
>>>>>
>>>>> +Cc Damjan
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for looping me in. If I remember correctly that was used only to get mlx PMDs working.
>>>> We can remove that calls but then mlx PMDs will stop working unless there is alternative solution.
>>>>
>>>>   From my perspective it is not big issue as we already have native rdma based mlx support, but i would expect that other people will complain.
>>>>
>>>> Is there alternative way to tell DPDK about DMA mapping?
>>>
>>> The rte_vfio_container_dma_map(VFIO_DEFAULT_CONTAINER, ...) is the exact
>>> equivalent of the functions being removed. Also, rte_dev_dma_map() is
>>> supposed to be the more general DMA mapping API that works with VFIO and
>>> with any other bus/device-specific DMA mapping.
>>>
>>> So yes, a simple search and replace for "rte_vfio_dma_(un)?map(" to
>>> "rte_vfio_container_dma_(un)?map(VFIO_DEFAULT_CONTAINER, " should
>>> trigger exactly the same behavior.
>>
>> The issue on VFIO_DEFAULT_CONTAINER seems fixed.
>> The deprecation had been announced (even if it was for 20.02) and we
>> have a replacement.
>>
>> So I am for taking this patch.
>> Any objection?
> 
> I agree to remove these functions.
> 

Nuke them from orbit :)

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly