From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E7F56A9 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2016 01:40:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2016 16:40:41 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,377,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="39886810" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2016 16:40:40 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx153.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.6) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:40:40 -0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.154) by FMSMSX153.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:40:40 -0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.117]) by shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.172]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 1 Feb 2016 08:40:38 +0800 From: "Zhang, Helin" To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API Thread-Index: AQHRWi34hQUKTA61kk2mny+0JcWB+Z8RsygAgAADtwCAAALLgIAAAcKAgAAGqgCABJlUMA== Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 00:40:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1445810400-8978-1-git-send-email-marcdevel@gmail.com> <1745156.01DTmyzyO8@xps13> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B000EC@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <14139435.dXsMv1AF6J@xps13> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B0014E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B0014E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 00:40:42 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 6:18 PM > To: Thomas Monjalon > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Marc Sune; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; Harish Patil; Che= n, > Jing D; Mcnamara, John > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config > API >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 9:54 AM > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Marc Sune; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; Harish Patil; > > Chen, Jing D; Mcnamara, John > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed > > config API > > > > 2016-01-29 09:47, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > 2016-01-29 09:24, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > > Can you avoid modifications in the e1000/base code? > > > > > We do not modify (and maintain) that part on our own. > > > > > Instead we take it straight from Intel ND. > > > > > So if you feel like these changes are really necessary - please > > > > > submit a patch to ND first, and if your changes will be applied, = will pick > it up from them. > > > > > > > > I was not aware we can submit a change to ND for Intel base drivers= . > > > > What is the procedure please? > > > > > > I meant not to the ND directly, but probably to the freebsd e1000 ker= nel > driver. > > > As I remember, that is the closest one to what we have. > > > From my understanding (I might be wrong here): > > > If they will be accepted, we should see these changes In next code dr= ops > from ND. > > > > These base drivers are used in several places. > > We are allowed to submit a patch in Linux or FreeBSD but not in DPDK > > where the base driver is verbatim? >=20 > Yes, that's my understanding. >=20 > > We have an agreement to not touch them in DPDK >=20 > Yes. >=20 > > but I still think the > > ND team could consider some patches from dpdk.org. >=20 > I personally think that would be a good thing, but it is up to ND guys to= make > such decision. [Zhang, Helin] The key reason of not touching base driver is we don't want = to maintain those source files, and just reuse others. This can help us a lot. We should try to avoid touching source files in base driver, but if you sti= ll insist something critical or a bug should be faced. First of all we can try to do = something in the dpdk developed source files (e.g. i40e_ethdev.c, i40e_rxtx.c, i40e_o= sdep.h). This was what we have done for a long time, and it works quite well. If there is no other way to fix a bug in base driver, we can try the way li= ke Konstantin indicated, or let me know, I will try to influence ND. But note = that this might be the lowest efficiency way, due to the complicated process. Sorry for any inconvenience! This the way we are using now might be the bes= t for us right now. Regards, Heiln >=20 > Konstantin