From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FA3511DE
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 05:57:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Jul 2016 20:57:34 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,344,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="1019201038"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Jul 2016 20:57:32 -0700
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:59:55 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
 "Loftus, Ciara" <ciara.loftus@intel.com>,
 Huawei Xie <huawei.xie@intel.com>,
 "Tan, Jianfeng" <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>,
 "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>, "Hu, Jiayu" <jiayu.hu@intel.com>,
 Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
Message-ID: <20160711035955.GA18850@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] remove vhost-cuse
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:57:35 -0000

It's something echoed around in my mind for a long while, and here I'm
gonna make it public: a proposal to remove vhost-cuse.

Vhost-cuse was invented before vhost-user exist. The both are actually
doing the same thing: a vhost-net implementation in user space. But they
are not exactly the same thing.

Firstly, vhost-cuse is harder for use; no one seems to care it, either.
Furthermore, since v2.1, a large majority of development effort has gone
to vhost-user. For example, we extended the vhost-user spec to add the
multiple queue support. We also added the vhost-user live migration at
v16.04 and the latest one, vhost-user reconnect that allows vhost app
restart without restarting the guest. Both of them are very important
features for product usage and none of them works for vhost-cuse.

You now see that the difference between vhost-user and vhost-cuse is
big (and will be bigger and bigger as time moves forward), that you
should never use vhost-cuse, that we should drop it completely.

The remove would also result to a much cleaner code base, allowing us
to do all kinds of extending easier.

A talk with Huawei offline showed that he backs this proposal. I was
also told by Ciara that she actually had the same idea: she has already
cooked a patch to remove vhost-cuse support from OVS:

    http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-July/074696.html

So I'm proposing to mark vhost-cuse as deprecated in this release and
remove it completely at the next release (v16.11).

Comments/thoughts, or objections?

	--yliu