Re: [PATCH v9 0/9] net/zxdh: introduce net zxdh driver

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>]

On 11/1/2024 6:21 AM, Junlong Wang wrote:
> v9:
>   - fix 'v8 3/9' patch use PCI bus API,
>     and common PCI constants according to David Marchand's comments.
> 
> v8:
>   - fix flexible arrays、Waddress-of-packed-member error.
>   - all structs、enum、define ,etc use zxdh/ZXDH_ prefixed.
>   - use zxdh_try/release_lock,and move loop into zxdh_timedlock,
>     make hardware lock follow spinlock pattern.
> 
> v7:
>   - add release notes and modify zxdh.rst issues.
>   - avoid use pthread and use rte_spinlock_lock.
>   - using the prefix ZXDH_ before some definitions.
>   - resole issues according to thomas's comments.
> 
> v6:
>   - Resolve ci/intel compilation issues.
>   - fix meson.build indentation in earlier patch.
> 
> V5:
>   - split driver into multiple patches,part of the zxdh driver,
>     later provide dev start/stop,queue_setup,npsdk_init,mac,vlan,rss ,etc.
>   - fix errors reported by scripts.
>   - move the product link in zxdh.rst.
>   - fix meson check use RTE_ARCH_X86_64/RTE_ARCH_ARM64.
>   - modify other comments according to Ferruh's comments.
> 
> Junlong Wang (9):
>   net/zxdh: add zxdh ethdev pmd driver
>   net/zxdh: add logging implementation
>   net/zxdh: add zxdh device pci init implementation
>   net/zxdh: add msg chan and msg hwlock init
>   net/zxdh: add msg chan enable implementation
>   net/zxdh: add zxdh get device backend infos
>   net/zxdh: add configure zxdh intr implementation
>   net/zxdh: add zxdh dev infos get ops
>   net/zxdh: add zxdh dev configure ops
> 

Hi Junlong,

I can see not all of the eth_dev_ops implemented, and datapath not
implemented, so driver is not functional right now.

What happens if you want to run testpmd with the current state of the
driver, I assume it crashes?

And what is the plan for the driver? Are you planning to upstream
remaining support in this release or in future releases?

As the driver is not functional yet, to set the expectation right for
the users, I suggest marking driver as experimental in the maintainers
file and document the restrictions in the driver documentation, also
clarify this in the release notes update, what do you think?