From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <stephen@networkplumber.org> Received: from mail-pf0-f176.google.com (mail-pf0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 891A61075 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 01:14:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pf0-f176.google.com with SMTP id x63so26145975pfx.2 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:14:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z5YxIAI5Y1ktg/muweMFybqvROmDgu1pFWp5MxWnUEo=; b=xQ02J7sVAd/R3/hF+nuZGYMWXZTHNt1ex6rIud2+fB9ET6K2V/Rc1M/lkCAUTftEnK VthY2Na2Se7TxfUGBwjVd/2DFIR+7oqgTS6n89zVdGDWJQ23q8soMDEGrB7gVLGwq5Xb w9xSBrLRq/qlCUTpK7SUXo0n6G/Qa5dFIuipkkvqEKJe2X2WBoAroy1mdGsTHN6zV8pz qgLXY2kop3lG7k2D3VT8J/NtFxUr3X+BgJLuuMCdBgpTqlJKnptfPAtU7tdeNXT2oAv3 Qhd+JxjmXy7Vxxrk14/gahzqQ6y3zT2OotOLA36Q6xCAQmPnBv6zG41p6X2lB5e/uqzx xrAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z5YxIAI5Y1ktg/muweMFybqvROmDgu1pFWp5MxWnUEo=; b=YoWP2q/yhIUNB0vI0X93cjLsmgGYEEeULR3BdmCp/x/H/BKiqygC4qcJ/DUQ5DX4NM gWS+aTuW5tX8fFnUyIa0DH/vm8XySuEto1rH2Il+YAiUbrEP9HSvepb/wvjXBEhLc+vQ SHm+YkPkm0zmHoWzfL9lXXa4hJm39RWZbumRrtqBpOfoU2LSzLUKc8ReB2ZcUIZC+dAh cPDi5QYOJYyTYudMXIsnNoVQqh2B9SOMSl+4CFNxN9gfayOC1f/VGFkEp76gL1fF20y3 lx22Z/SsndsAll0N1Fs3stclEVHq5tnCQn7b7CL5d03OP7gzXQdasAdEt/s5dZW/sCkH P0Eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2j9gEeWMH6qsJlc6JGqgLOejfpcqelXhKhS+Xqq/oKMKzXvdjGwXBiWvgZrhBukQ== X-Received: by 10.98.35.146 with SMTP id q18mr13427848pfj.59.1489709672654; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:14:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (204-195-18-65.wavecable.com. [204.195.18.65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p6sm12755748pgn.40.2017.03.16.17.14.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:14:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:14:25 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> Cc: Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@6wind.com>, "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>, "Legacy, Allain (Wind River)" <allain.legacy@windriver.com>, "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River)" <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, "thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>, "3chas3@gmail.com" <3chas3@gmail.com>, "stefanha@gmail.com" <stefanha@gmail.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20170316171425.7f6ee01f@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <D95C149C-9811-45B9-B6D6-A1C6D6AE8A63@intel.com> References: <1488414008-162839-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <1489432593-32390-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <4b3a0ff4-3d19-8e4b-0cbf-2a08e6433285@6wind.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA7231E927@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170316161731.34b94669@xeon-e3> <73cdfe30-ed3b-6dd6-a2d8-fc2873fb65f3@6wind.com> <D95C149C-9811-45B9-B6D6-A1C6D6AE8A63@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/17] Wind River Systems AVP PMD vs virtio? - ivshmem is back X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:14:33 -0000 On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:11:10 +0000 "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2017, at 7:41 AM, Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@6wind.com> = wrote: > >=20 > > Let's be back to 2014 with Qemu's thoughts on it, > > +Stefan > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/2014-June/02= 6767.html > >=20 > > and > > +Markus > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/2014-June/02= 6713.html > > =20 > >> 6. Device models belong into QEMU > >>=20 > >> Say you build an actual interface on top of ivshmem. Then ivshmem in > >> QEMU together with the supporting host code outside QEMU (see 3.) and > >> the lower layer of the code using it in guests (kernel + user space) > >> provide something that to me very much looks like a device model. > >>=20 > >> Device models belong into QEMU. It's what QEMU does. =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Le 17/03/2017 =C3=A0 00:17, Stephen Hemminger a =C3=A9crit : =20 > >> On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 04:10:56 +0000 > >> "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com> wrote: > >> =20 > >>> I've included a couple of specific comments inline below, and a gener= al comment here. > >>>=20 > >>> We have somebody proposing to add a new driver to DPDK. It's standalo= ne and doesn't affect any of the core libraries. They're willing to maintai= n the driver and have included a patch to update the maintainers file. They= 've also included the relevant documentation changes. I haven't seen any ne= gative comment on the patches themselves except for a request from John McN= amara for an update to the Release Notes that was addressed in a later vers= ion. I think we should be welcoming this into DPDK rather than questioning/= rejecting it. > >>>=20 > >>> I'd suggest that this is a good topic for the next Tech Board meeting= . =20 > >>=20 > >> This is a virtualization driver for supporting DPDK on platform that p= rovides an alternative > >> virtual network driver. I see no reason it shouldn't be part of DPDK. = Given the unstable > >> ABI for drivers, supporting out of tree DPDK drivers is difficult. The= DPDK should try > >> to be inclusive and support as many environments as possible. > >> =20 > >=20 > > On Qemu mailing list, back to 2014, I did push to build models of devic= es over ivshmem, like AVP, but folks did not want that we abuse of it. The = Qemu community wants that we avoid unfocusing. So, by being too much inclus= ive, we abuse of the Qemu's capabilities. > >=20 > > So, because of being "inclusive", we should allow any cases, it is not = a proper way to make sure that virtio gets all the focuses it deserves. > >=20 > > =20 >=20 > Why are we bring QEMU in to the picture it does not make a lot of sense t= o me. Stephen stated it well above and I hope my comments were stating the = same conclusion. I do not see your real reasons for not allowing this drive= r into DPDK, it seems like some other hidden agenda is at play here, but I = am a paranoid person :-) I am thinking of people already using Windriver systems. One can argue all = you want that they should be using QEMU/KVM/Virtio or 6Wind Virtual Accelerator but it is= not the role of DPDK to be used to influence customers architecture decisions.