From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC98A0548; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 12:16:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FA7D40040; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 12:16:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE5854003C for ; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 12:16:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id y67so4228083iof.10 for ; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 03:16:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FKgR13Svw8P4NItQZr6r5AFooGsQmQHcYfL7+4ZIw6E=; b=D1uJg3Mp0gZQLZE80knNX1Lau4ZSprki3gmQFZ2CaxjP483xCJMvGQC7cW3+/zIeA9 K4CQJ7DY2bgcbL03zx1UHP80rluknWObKVT3hc21eUG7dgZZbCDrx/mqJUkyUq1lGQvC Zs0LC5iEuS6aKG+ZHSvX8MyNemrH32TeT/eEzGpHJ6CEGuCntGCL0NaViOlg6Gy4/c1i BWGDZyN7JQAS3IHNhueB6rhxjmwKDMPvuh8keKNivoFDjarKec3QnKOB7Qx9zB4x9AcS X34O0aJrnzDVZwhwYZP4r6pDf1AD8LQQ5m4paRLWyCfkC4yBJkgMxzWJvrcHRUI0jC2W kGSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FKgR13Svw8P4NItQZr6r5AFooGsQmQHcYfL7+4ZIw6E=; b=MoeqSA3Q2VKis2Svtk7FiabTVBBVadiDd/eJO51p4lRcnJIfzwumSLLUDzOa32D4YV GhG4ZAn9mqCs+OIH5BS/rDlAP5To4c7g5/ccBbHt4wTEiI9bP9KACyCpweuiIaul3/4+ WDv2AsYm8m7lC5QsTWHKU4sYfMqisKFkVsafCrNM6cosKbaGMwXewxeQ25IN1kTLCBzj PeTF6Ue3Pnh9Pg77PNLvdW39VkV/gATGMDItsz0OHbK2X8H2MnSFqmMoMdGhZzOL3ot9 IzQCnIUBWnfO6haTGG57FTctp2zKYcO2xh4SuYB8CzQM/ZpOkdgEx0TdXhA9FCOyIVfC XSNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334VLaySBGG/qf6838MzSnpfIJvUXATGzOZMIKudHmrWA/1X2tK N9oNrfa400XmYpNgaYfLDnNSJArXdkLgAJDesk4p9TFE X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwmybuRwFPTDZ/v+WBF+I5InJy4n8DZIrFAd/yJxmjhvm6kSCVELJkg4Jd4vU6XeMFKTFK+Qb6eCF81GFBTY5E= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:102:: with SMTP id 2mr14481539iob.185.1633861015920; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 03:16:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210602203531.2288645-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20211009015349.9694-1-eagostini@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: <20211009015349.9694-1-eagostini@nvidia.com> From: Jerin Jacob Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 15:46:30 +0530 Message-ID: To: Elena Agostini , Thomas Monjalon , Ferruh Yigit , Honnappa Nagarahalli Cc: dpdk-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/9] GPU library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 11:13 PM wrote: > > From: eagostini > > In heterogeneous computing system, processing is not only in the CPU. > Some tasks can be delegated to devices working in parallel. > > The goal of this new library is to enhance the collaboration between > DPDK, that's primarily a CPU framework, and GPU devices. > > When mixing network activity with task processing on a non-CPU device, > there may be the need to put in communication the CPU with the device > in order to manage the memory, synchronize operations, exchange info, etc.. > > This library provides a number of new features: > - Interoperability with GPU-specific library with generic handlers > - Possibility to allocate and free memory on the GPU > - Possibility to allocate and free memory on the CPU but visible from the GPU > - Communication functions to enhance the dialog between the CPU and the GPU In the RFC thread, There was one outstanding non technical issues on this, i.e The above features are driver specific details. Does the DPDK _application_ need to be aware of this? aka DPDK device class has a fixed personality and it has API to deal with abstracting specific application specific end user functionality like ethdev, cryptodev, eventdev irrespective of underlying bus/device properties. Even similar semantics are required for DPU(Smart NIC) communitication. I am planning to send RFC in coming days to address the issue without the application knowing the Bus/HW/Driver details. Irrespective of the RFC I am planning to send and since the new library needs techboard approval, You may request that the techboard decide approval for this library. Also, As far as I remember a minimum a SW driver in additional to HW driver to accept a new driver class. Just my 2c to save your cycles.