[dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/6] remove pci driver from vdevs
John W. Linville
linville at tuxdriver.com
Fri Aug 28 19:51:33 CEST 2015
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
What is the overall purpose of this RFC? What benefit accrues to
those vdev PMDs that implement this change? What penalty is imposed
on those that do not change?
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