[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API
konstantin.ananyev at intel.com
Fri Jan 29 11:17:38 CET 2016
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 9:54 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Marc Sune; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; Harish Patil; Chen, Jing D; Mcnamara, John
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API
> 2016-01-29 09:47, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> > > 2016-01-29 09:24, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > > > Can you avoid modifications in the e1000/base code?
> > > > We do not modify (and maintain) that part on our own.
> > > > Instead we take it straight from Intel ND.
> > > > So if you feel like these changes are really necessary - please submit a patch
> > > > to ND first, and if your changes will be applied, will pick it up from them.
> > >
> > > I was not aware we can submit a change to ND for Intel base drivers.
> > > What is the procedure please?
> > I meant not to the ND directly, but probably to the freebsd e1000 kernel driver.
> > As I remember, that is the closest one to what we have.
> > From my understanding (I might be wrong here):
> > If they will be accepted, we should see these changes In next code drops from ND.
> These base drivers are used in several places.
> We are allowed to submit a patch in Linux or FreeBSD but not in DPDK
> where the base driver is verbatim?
Yes, that's my understanding.
> We have an agreement to not touch them in DPDK
> but I still think the
> ND team could consider some patches from dpdk.org.
I personally think that would be a good thing,
but it is up to ND guys to make such decision.
More information about the dev