From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6548711DE; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 03:06:30 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=intel; t=1489716391; x=1521252391; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=1D1+tJ8YBmxIjW9LeJWlP07RYw5VbVN+WCQr/ilz360=; b=WV0xHMyH/0OPzkiPJFHTElm0CEPhwj6Hq7JWNObcRLY7W9G/gCuRWsEF OQhPZ19lMgh85v/wIcC6oFG9sXFsQg==; Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2017 19:06:29 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,174,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="237330705" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Mar 2017 19:06:28 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.7) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:06:29 -0700 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.153) by FMSMSX113.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:06:28 -0700 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.20]) by SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.177]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:24 +0800 From: "Zhang, Qi Z" To: Thomas Monjalon , "techboard@dpdk.org" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Wu, Jingjing" , "Zhang, Helin" , "Yigit, Ferruh" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: enable statistic reset for VF Thread-Index: AQHSjj3Drk13tFTmD06h6aQUdJRHgaGXOx6AgAEd88A= Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:06:23 +0000 Message-ID: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115306744A@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1487874421-11934-1-git-send-email-qi.z.zhang@intel.com> <2062537.uIRGRt8aVp@xps13> In-Reply-To: <2062537.uIRGRt8aVp@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMTgzMDkyZWEtMzMxYS00ZThkLWI2MTEtZmY1NjkxYjk1ZWI2IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IkpMeEJEVWJCeXBqQXFvd1lHZUlheXJ2ZWNsVitCZndmNkxKa1htYmVGeTQ9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: enable statistic reset for VF X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:06:32 -0000 Hi Thomas: =09 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 12:04 AM > To: Zhang, Qi Z ; techboard@dpdk.org > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing ; Zhang, Helin > ; Yigit, Ferruh > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/i40e: enable statistic reset for VF >=20 > 2017-02-23 13:27, Qi Zhang: > > static void > > +i40evf_dev_stats_reset(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) { > > + struct i40e_vf *vf =3D > I40EVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(dev->data->dev_private); > > + /* only DPDK PF support this */ > > + if (vf->version_major =3D=3D I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { > > + if (i40evf_reset_statistics(dev)) > > + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Reset statistics failed"); > > + } > > +} >=20 > One more SR-IOV feature not supported with a Linux PF. > The basic stats feature must be marked as partially supported in > doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini > See also this email: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/060063.html Thanks for your capture Actually I already got feedback from my team member and noticed this is not right way, we should not do more to add divergence between PF. So please regards this as my inattentive action, and please ignore this pat= ch. >=20 > I wonder whether we should allow such divergence between PF > implementations.=20 No, we should not >Intel committed to avoid such fragmentation and keep the > SR-IOV messaging standard but it does not happen. > It is said that we must allow fast innovation in DPDK space. > I agree but we should also target a good usability of the VF drivers, all= owing > to replace the PF implementations as needed. >=20 > Here is my suggestion: let's accept a VF feature only if the PF support i= s > submitted to both dpdk.org and kernel.org mailing lists. > I ask to add this topic to the next techboard meeting. Thanks Qi