From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 296C13DC for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 10:47:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Aug 2017 01:47:39 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.41,415,1498546800"; d="scan'208";a="1006751248" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.24]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 23 Aug 2017 01:47:36 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 23 Aug 2017 09:47:36 +0100 Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 09:47:35 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Markus Theil , ferruh.yigit@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20170823084735.GB10356@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1503336825-7700-1-git-send-email-markus.theil@tu-ilmenau.de> <20170822095553.418ed188@xeon-e3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170822095553.418ed188@xeon-e3> Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] igb_uio: MSI IRQ mode, irq enable/disable refactored 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: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 08:47:40 -0000 On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 09:55:53AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 19:33:45 +0200 > Markus Theil wrote: > > > This patch adds MSI IRQ mode and in a way, that should > > also work on older kernel versions. The base for my patch > > was an attempt to do this in cf705bc36c which was later reverted in > > d8ee82745a. Compilation was tested on Linux 3.2, 4.10 and 4.12. > > > > MSI(X) setup was already using pci_alloc_irq_vectors before, > > but calls to pci_free_irq_vectors were missing and added. > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Theil > > I wonder if DPDK should only N-1 Long Term Stable kernel.org kernels? > That would mean 4.4.83 or later now, and 4.9 or later starting with 18.XX releases. > > If enterprise distro's want to backport more, that is their prerogative but upstream > DPDK shouldn't have to worry about it. The current mess with KNI especially is out > of hand. I agree in principal about limiting ourselves to only supporting a more limited set of kernel versions in mainline. However, the exact number of versions probably needs some discussion - my initial impression is that what you propose is a little too limited.