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 9795B1075 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:30:38 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id t189so58838177wmt.1 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 02:30:38 -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=lRaIPNmzFEIjOgdDqla3u9DGmQH31jsPp1j6xMuSH5g=; b=WQF0fvmdw62Q0KxnWabOA2EhmmSSoyUQQY0NN3cFmOjTKGgfvjGxnUK6gq1alnJWVo y2GRJctpkfE+HLNF9QR4XvxuecjQqUL61CazSW95Ct44bS41c1V3gDomgKoOTzFzP+7S Ip/E2FON4+fuIwwW51bGhkREDXhoksC4AnJqjn5T3k8uNjhHKUCvtIOe5+XGd/V0JUxv AHaew2UoiYD833ZHYtxJhHqjzKhcEOcAGZWocwefezjRTkYKmWT2sZPkUcG0/VbW3xPJ dXRXPwn4XFrRK4AgNR0KRiCFxcbuXct2Yjpuiyndw3aZ1NuQFMCj7xkDQzBoRVuqXE6L i09A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lRaIPNmzFEIjOgdDqla3u9DGmQH31jsPp1j6xMuSH5g=; b=nf7MyXgoGuR7+zeyvYMZSJm3YRCKuyFJUVVhz+XJmmiKo3Io9SsMlsUk8mV8HxHdKA PTNEi3hlizkphz1AClbnkXhJuxFDHOLD0Dr2coVQF4Bz6Cmhma25EoQWVXdwWxr15k5O R5vRkQPV12qzvIj3MiVHKszkJgNfzcEJHtmn2pTH3EvZ3mRaZAQV44bz8xT19uW+1yqS wi82rja6AYXTAytpqoZqyLVY62nS8q37SlNdSr6fU6fQqYA7BAXAUGxwwcHdGlPqGzhr Tsd/oIwDMZ821HcoR0rXlxaxlao2Lt7HIn2GA5z2+9K+AfTzAc2+rAeM9Oq6AXlpYrIA 4WOg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2B94Yg4yoDSfMpBvK62t5lHBbesAXi0oEAvuqHPS5oQ8c+09r4Hv7YdSs4rZp8MOTi X-Received: by 10.28.152.212 with SMTP id a203mr13246259wme.36.1489483838259; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 02:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y1sm14626043wme.15.2017.03.14.02.30.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 02:30:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Wu, Jingjing" Cc: "Zhang, Helin" , "Chen, Jing D" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "vincent.jardin@6wind.com" , dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:30:37 +0100 Message-ID: <4821072.3Tgk4G3lTr@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CF32CE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <248236628.l6b5mhHNAu@xps13> <1623193.ZGhhn5RSHY@xps13> <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CF32CE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF 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: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:30:38 -0000 2017-03-14 04:44, Wu, Jingjing: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > Hi i40e developers, > > > > > > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the > > > same regardless of the PF driver: > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html > > > " > > > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate > > > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF. > > > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward. > > > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF > > > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF > > > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF > > > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope) > > > [...] > > > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago. > > > > There is some test activities ongoing. > > > " > > > > > > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration. > > > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and > > > i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this: > > > " > > > /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */ > > > if (vf->version_major == I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { " > > > > > > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour > > > as with a DPDK PF? > > > > > As I know, VFD features are marked with an "EXPERIMENTAL" tag. > And we are working on the extendable interface (feature based) with > PF kernel driver. The VLAN offload is not a VFD feature. It is a basic driver feature. It is said that it is supported in the documentation but it is not with a Linux PF. Please consider the rest of my email: > > At least, it must be documented in > > doc/guides/nics/features/i40e_vf.ini > > and marked as partially supported (P instead of Y) in > > doc/guides/nics/i40e.rst