From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01BA7B16D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:20:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19])
 by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2014 09:20:09 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,501,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="447100540"
Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159])
 by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2014 09:20:08 -0700
Received: from irsmsx151.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.59) by
 IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.123.3; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:18:28 +0100
Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.58]) by
 IRSMSX151.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.152]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003;
 Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:18:27 +0100
From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org"
 <dev@dpdk.org>
Thread-Topic: vfio detection
Thread-Index: Ac+Jr+QsX/7njye/SDa+CSH3FJFocAAVxw1QABBHEgAAJwYCMAALJt4Q
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:18:27 +0000
Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA37A14@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA36B6E@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E451236976CC9C5FA@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA370A7@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E451236976CC9CCDC@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E451236976CC9CCDC@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] vfio detection
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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, 18 Jun 2014 16:20:06 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Burakov, Anatoly
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:01 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: vfio detection
>=20
> Hi Bruce,
>=20
> > > > I have a number of NIC ports which were working correctly yesterday
> > > > and are bound correctly to the igb_uio driver - and I want to keep
> > > > using them through the igb_uio driver for now, not vfio. However,
> > > > whenever I run a dpdk application today, I find that the vfio kerne=
l
> > > > module is getting loaded each time - even after I manually remove
> > > > it, and verify that it has been removed by checking lsmod. Is this
> > > > expected? If so, why are we loading the vfio driver when I just wan=
t to
> > continue using igb_uio which works fine?
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate a bit on what do you mean by "loading vfio driver"?
> > > Do you mean the vfio-pci kernel gets loaded by DPDK? I certainly
> > > didn't put in any code that would automatically load that driver, and
> > certainly not binding devices to it.
> >
> > The kernel module called just "vfio" is constantly getting reloaded, an=
d there
> > is always a "/dev/vfio" directory, which triggers the vfio code handlin=
g every
> > time I run dpdk.
>=20
> I can't reproduce this.
>=20
> Please note that VFIO actually consists of three drivers (on an x86 syste=
m, that
> is) - vfio (the core VFIO infrastructure such as containers), vfio_iommu_=
type1
> (support for x86-style IOMMU) and vfio-pci (the generic PCI driver). I ha=
ve
> unloaded all three and ran dpdk_nic_bind and testpmd - it worked fine and=
 no
> VFIO kernel drivers were loaded as a result.
>=20
Ok, maybe a one-off. The proposed patches to dpdk to improve the detection =
of vfio fix the real issue for me anyway, so I'm no longer concerned.