From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com (mail-wm0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5CF05A72 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 01:15:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id q128so37416326wma.1 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:15:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r7NpcSunHidyeF9B2RpQoJlgCOc4zdYqPLe2zkFvO0Y=; b=Mc/TBTEcJ9Gn6V4XzuuyHOSmxJ3H4yP+rqoGrROJ/HuOvlgxSe/57YBUisJTd274WZ IgLMrBiLu43Wi38KQl3ZsRGkHVg6xnnmiFaTtOOxF5HAeooX1BJgZYQVsRA9FTETz7qJ pRCAzRJAKYQV3Gn27aY+tYOaKqqbzVD2E8x+EZm8hlvEeFQrNkdVnH+UYnsou5I+Mq40 dpMTlBGLLh57GzCxeqVprJ8jva2zXMK92gXnOufX851oTDXPD/1G2PdNA406P94bdIuA RwJs5EsQCw4JQm42m1PzjrKgSg61VHSaskIgQMhfXco27SfvICm77qr0cRj57gtO6byt 8RDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r7NpcSunHidyeF9B2RpQoJlgCOc4zdYqPLe2zkFvO0Y=; b=IMYOBfSf5Tqz8G15DjQ2h0oto0pCs7KV/u5s4zRtzIxcJdcGItYuVmbo2WXQGSIdzK XsHYv65XoOgCWML7vNxikN1QJ1qirP4+KAjBSM9goGcmU9fhuRCPaami4mhdaXMBGvZr gKU04/OQKRM4LiyWoCUhzutFOqtLHH6hO8CBU/quVIpYub2YWsOSETKhODFErTxHXN+w X9T51dutdJIiuHJz8IjDwZ9+kWqoz4h+HVBXQsWdc0nPJ0vEYQjRO2aXQ3sKsaayFPba 874m94GKHcu4QnMk1vz/7eS9YYYlpKb1a4XuXdFksq+P+69BGcOZuSB0wbR+8yJB8pbX /gCg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJwUkpDn02V39wkU/3h4H4Kb7lxr5JTFYBakFuWZpoG00FSKtMFpPvqzvemUbMLJ8HG X-Received: by 10.28.63.8 with SMTP id m8mr22270222wma.88.1469142933532; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d62sm8037884wmd.7.2016.07.21.16.15.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:15:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jay Rolette Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 01:15:32 +0200 Message-ID: <2696944.7TksCpEKlK@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1469030873-5966-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <7298712.p7zDOZdSxl@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 23:15:34 -0000 2016-07-21 15:54, Jay Rolette: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon > wrote: > > 2016-07-21 13:20, Jay Rolette: > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Ferruh Yigit > > > wrote: > > > > KNI ethtool is functional and maintained, and it may have users! > > > > > > > > Why just removing it, specially without providing an alternative? > > > > Is is good time to discuss KCP again? > > > > > > Yes, my product uses it. > > > > Your product uses what? KCP? KNI? KNI ethtool? > > Sorry, that wasn't very clear. It uses KNI + ifconfig to configure the > device/interface in Linux. I'm assuming the "ethtool" bits under discussion > are the same things that make ifconfig work with KNI to the limited extent > it does. What are you configuring with ifconfig? > > Seems like we are back to the same discussion we > > > had a few months ago about the KNI situation... > > > > > > It shouldn't be removed unless there is a replacement, ideally one that > > > works with the normal Linux tools like every other network device. > > > > This ethtool module works only for igb and ixgbe! > > There is already no replacement for other drivers. > > Who works on a replacement? > > Ferruh submitted KCP previously, but you guys didn't like the fact that it > was a kernel module. No we didn't like having yet another out-of-tree kernel module. We'd love having KCP in Linux. > IIRC, one of the gains from that was simplified > maintenance because you didn't need driver specific support for KNI. > Assuming he's still willing to beat it into shape, we have something that > is already most of the way there. > > If people are going to continue to block it because it is a kernel module, > then IMO, it's better to leave the existing support on igx / ixgbe in place > instead of stepping backwards to zero support for ethtool. Maybe that one day you will want to use something else than ixgbe in your product (and have more than 10 Gb). This day you'll find other solutions than using KNI ethtool. > > While the code wasn't ready at the time, it was a definite improvement > > over what we have with KNI today.