From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Helin Zhang <helin.zhang@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK and HW offloads
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:00:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <10753400.05iPBPOT6f@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160318101611.2df26ef6@xeon-e3>
2016-03-18 10:16, Stephen Hemminger:
> As I look at how the ethernet device interface in DPDK has exploded in complexity;
Yes I would like to start addressing this complexity in 16.07.
> it makes life very hard for end users. The goal has been to enable all the cool hardware
> features, but it has put blinders on the driver devlopers; they are ignoring the fact
> that real applications can't just work on one kind of hardware.
+1
> The DPDK is doing a terrible job at providing abstractions. There needs to be a
> real generic set of operations, and every hardware offload feature must:
> * have a clear well defined API
+1
> * if feature is not available in software, then the DPDK must provide
> a software equivalent feature.
I'm not against this idea. Looking for more opinions.
> * any difference in API must be hidden from application.
> * no compile config options about offload.
> * tests and documentation must work for both hw and sw version
>
> Right now, all those offload features are pretty much unusable in a real product
> without lots and lots of extra codes and huge bug surface. It bothers me enough
> that I would recommend removing much of the filter/offload/ptype stuff from DPDK!
One of the biggest challenge is to think about a good filtering API.
The offloading has some interaction with the mbuf struct.
I would like to suggest rewriting ethdev API by keeping it as is for some time for
compatibility while creating a new one. What about the prefix dpdk_netdev_ to
progressively replace rte_eth_dev?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-18 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-18 17:16 Stephen Hemminger
2016-03-18 18:00 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-03-20 14:17 ` Zhang, Helin
2016-03-20 19:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-21 14:52 ` Bruce Richardson
2016-03-21 15:26 ` Kyle Larose
2016-03-22 5:50 ` Qiu, Michael
2016-03-22 10:19 ` Bruce Richardson
2016-03-22 12:19 ` Jay Rolette
2016-03-22 17:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-03-22 17:41 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-03-23 2:47 ` Qiu, Michael
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=10753400.05iPBPOT6f@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).