From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <vincent.jardin@6wind.com> Received: from mail-wr0-f178.google.com (mail-wr0-f178.google.com [209.85.128.178]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0170E1396 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:08:41 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u108so11798300wrb.3 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 07:08:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TsVBHltWt4VAAfbpOYpdMQEzd53Eg82waguyWimod+s=; b=uKr+d/ZIyHTo2L5Itp/TAcgCOyhJiZC6MXnoWa6sTTsizfI5C/eJ87MyeDDEks3SZ9 PXsu55wTqhlMzeXKuLSZdO46ob6kvpZT08KlpPhv38u6rtOeKZUNLEmHZoi9lHa6oyLu MQ3/GWwjfl387AlnFcri6qN1pZqOZMlvHm5hQWd6ipINKxRPmD86Lj4Xa1mVY6xwe0V8 IyAiwJL3rfBWSC6tLj1+UkdbCYJJEmeVRDXWUAxglcTh3NET0IGtnyvTixkygOLLemS4 ejnDUq6eo7D9PC7GkYdim9g14J5jMb8cgWJOyrF84Wy+7hwBXZMYTYGLL5KOggiRGGKD bUow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=TsVBHltWt4VAAfbpOYpdMQEzd53Eg82waguyWimod+s=; b=DiQNPF6ssRXWgav1rlm7S3gJiz8lLRJYtI37IqSBmVKJ3GFSRd0ObBP3cvEDJ34xH4 PR9IjyYvDbv/fg8vcLKQsrVUoOnFvyJ8Kj2Ep1+fn0r3VaR+LL4d+ZiEk5sIY0TLTR86 B7VTKGdJX72e4JFYepSI0pKaKoEK2wSPeNeOch9m2DLzF+RmcSFVU8lH4dUOtaGeCcCe 8UjYNhSdp+QEddAX/pkU/1ogxSlKzthvvwe65HmAvmU52JDrucOgsXAmzeh0NEVi09/F upwrmflZAnoPCN5Mn0EaI+blX4RwfYg7XYARFE3TFQ4eiz8hzX6+TIlX+mgxoRJNdD/x DokQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0cLfXnuLGtTLJRp4iHckYcoLLFJA5yvsExXLyi0PqpQaw7cADEcR9tAUIKVwAQHRZ1 X-Received: by 10.223.161.140 with SMTP id u12mr3056506wru.140.1489586921775; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 07:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.87] ([80.215.227.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 32sm2492503wrr.64.2017.03.15.07.08.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Mar 2017 07:08:40 -0700 (PDT) To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>, "thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> References: <1488414008-162839-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <1489432593-32390-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <4b3a0ff4-3d19-8e4b-0cbf-2a08e6433285@6wind.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA7231E927@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <127aa10b-13d3-0265-dcb5-0639c60898e8@intel.com> Cc: "Legacy, Allain (Wind River)" <allain.legacy@windriver.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River)" <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>, "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>, "stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>, "3chas3@gmail.com" <3chas3@gmail.com> From: Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@6wind.com> Organization: www.6wind.com Message-ID: <5505728b-8fc7-9e7a-15e4-776392fae9e7@6wind.com> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:08:38 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <127aa10b-13d3-0265-dcb5-0639c60898e8@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/17] Wind River Systems AVP PMD vs virtio? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:42 -0000 Le 15/03/2017 à 12:29, Ferruh Yigit a écrit : > The scope of the patch is limited to PMD. > As long as it is maintained, it is good to have alternative approaches. From your logic, then, how many PMDs can be accepted? See my previous email: techboard should not bypass discussion of the dev@ mailing list. I believe that the question for the techboard is about the number of PMDs that we can get into the DPDK: if any PMDs can get in, so AVP, fail-safe, xyz, whatever the models that are proposed. We could even get 2 PMDs of a same (v)NIC, but with different implementation-designs. Best regards, Vincent