[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] nfp: report link speed using hardware info

Ferruh Yigit ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Mon Nov 21 11:57:04 CET 2016

On 11/18/2016 4:50 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com>
> wrote:
>> 2016-11-18 16:06, Alejandro Lucero:
>>> Previous reported speed was hardcoded.
>>> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero at netronome.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c      | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>  drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net_ctrl.h | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> You should update the doc in the same patch:
>>         doc/guides/nics/features/nfp.ini
>> It will be the first feature as the file appears to be empty.
>> So you will need another patch to fill other existing features.
> Yes. I'm just working on updating that file properly.
> May I delay this doc change for including it with that other one?
> It will be a bit weird to just have one feature there.

I think yes, but can you please send the documentation patch before
integration deadline of this release?

>> I have an unrelated question: why nfp is disabled in the default build?
> Because NFP PMD can just work if Netronome BSP is installed in the system.

Is this BSP open source and freely available? If so, can you update the
document with details (how/where to get it) please?

> We do not support PF with the PMD, so it requires a Linux PF driver which
> comes with the BSP.
> The compilation has no dependencies, but we had our own UIO driver before
> (now using igb_uio). So basically, we wanted the people aware of this
> dependency and to specifically configure this option.
> I know what you are surely going to ask about DPDK in Linux distributions,
> and that this being a bad idea. The fact is, we have people using NFP PMD
> as part of a product, so installing that product implies to (automatically)
> install the BSP and a specific DPDK version with the NFP PMD enabled. But
> yes, maybe we should modify this and to add some sort of BSP check inside
> the PMD.

Is there a DPDK version <-> BSP version dependency?

> So, thanks for the heads up. I will think about this.

More information about the dev mailing list