From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBE9CF90 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:15:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Mar 2017 01:15:19 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,268,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="1106547294" Received: from kryan2-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.21.182]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 09 Mar 2017 01:15:15 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 09 Mar 2017 09:15:15 +0000 Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 09:15:14 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Neil Horman Cc: Gaetan Rivet , dev@dpdk.org, Thomas Monjalon , Adrien Mazarguil Message-ID: <20170309091514.GB302480@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20170308165402.GA20936@neilslaptop.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170308165402.GA20936@neilslaptop.think-freely.org> Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/13] introduce fail-safe PMD 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: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 09:15:19 -0000 On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 11:54:02AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 04:15:33PM +0100, Gaetan Rivet wrote: > > This PMD intercepts and manages Ethernet device removal events issued by > > slave PMDs and re-initializes them transparently when brought back so that > > existing applications do not need to be modified to benefit from true > > hot-plugging support. > > > > The stacked PMD approach shares many similarities with the bonding PMD but > > with a different purpose. While bonding provides the ability to group > > several links into a single logical device for enhanced throughput and > > supports fail-over at link level, this one manages the sudden disappearance > > of the underlying device; it guarantees applications face a valid device in > > working order at all times. > > > Why not just add this feature to the bonding pmd then? A bond is perfectly > capable of handling the trivial case of a single underlying device, and adding > an option to make the underly slave 'persistent' seem both much simpler in terms > of implementation and code size, than adding an entire new pmd, along with its > supporting code. > > Neil > +1 I don't like the idea of having multiple PMDs in DPDK to handle combining multiple other devices into one. /Bruce