From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C18239 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 19:00:21 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Dec 2017 10:00:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,392,1508828400"; d="scan'208,217";a="186029680" Received: from awalabdu-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.21.64]) ([10.252.21.64]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Dec 2017 10:00:16 -0800 To: Alex Rosenbaum Cc: Ferruh Yigit , DPDK , Declan Doherty References: <1510929733-7225-1-git-send-email-mohammad.abdul.awal@intel.com> <7c9ed339-3fb6-2768-4a72-407111b1a33b@intel.com> <61e87b33-30e0-3398-3484-ce851728741e@intel.com> From: Mohammad Abdul Awal Message-ID: <4a07c2ea-fa99-ae36-a584-bffaa98357c6@intel.com> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:00:16 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/6] ethdev: added switch_domain and representor port flag 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: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:00:22 -0000 Hi Alex, On 11/12/2017 13:45, Alex Rosenbaum wrote: > Mohammad, > > I did not see a v2 change log. did I miss it? please send. > The V2 change is for vdev handling by the representor PMD as the vdev API location changed from DPDK 17.08 to 17.11. So, V2 patch mainly a rebased against DPDK 17.11. > I don't understand who this v2 addresses the comments by Alejandro > Lucero from netronome [1]. > These are critical points which your proposal does not handle. It is > related to the switch_domain member exposed here. Since, none of the initial NICs (i40e, ixgbe) is using switch_domain for the moment, we are dropping the switch_domain from these patch set. It is expected to be address in future patchset with switchdev support. Regards, Awal. > > thanks, > Alex > > [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-September/074904.html