From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3F5558D for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2017 00:50:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from pps.filterd (m0083689.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v0DNiuIx012187; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:50:39 -0500 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 27y6hraw44-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:50:39 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v0DNocGV013848; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:50:39 -0500 Received: from mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.241]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v0DNoSHT013744 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:50:33 -0500 Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (clpi183.sldc.sbc.com [135.41.1.46]) by mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 23:50:07 GMT Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v0DNo7hR016069; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:50:07 -0600 Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (mail-green.research.att.com [135.207.255.15]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v0DNo1TQ015697; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:50:02 -0600 Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njmtcas2.research.att.com [135.207.255.47]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12183E03DF; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:49:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njmtcas2.research.att.com ([fe80::d550:ec84:f872:cad9%15]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:50:00 -0500 From: "JOSHI, KAUSTUBH (KAUSTUBH)" To: John Fastabend CC: "Chen, Jing D" , Vincent JARDIN , "DANIELS, EDWARD S (EDWARD)" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "ZELEZNIAK, ALEX" , "Fastabend, John R" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 00/29] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel VF on i40e Thread-Index: AQHSZs7LlciJ6rQoHU+XRVTcGXNonaEyEXaAgAKB+gCAAtVugP//uQVx Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 23:49:59 +0000 Message-ID: <6FE891CC-F927-4719-B7F8-BCF8EB4DEF9F@research.att.com> References: <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D3C5CA3DA@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <586D647A.5040607@research.att.com> <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D3C5D9598@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>, <58795CE3.4080403@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <58795CE3.4080403@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-01-13_13:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1612050000 definitions=main-1701130305 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 16:52:14 +0100 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 00/29] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel VF on i40e 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: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 23:50:41 -0000 John, Thanks for comments. To answer a specific question you raised: > Open question for me on this though is the PF in these SRIOV cases > ever being used by DPDK datapath or is it just being leveraged for > configuration with primarily control traffic? In our case, the answer is yes. We intend to use the PF through DPDK to hou= se a high speed packet mirror function for capturing packet traces from VFs= (for ops etc).=20 However, in theory, this *can* be done through an extra VF as well, so I di= dn't bring up that particular point as being a deciding factor in this deba= te.=20 > On Jan 13, 2017, at 6:04 PM, John Fastabend wr= ote: >=20 > Open question for me on this though is the PF in these SRIOV cases > ever being used by DPDK datapath or is it just being leveraged for > configuration with primarily control traffic?