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 6752045689; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390A040EF0; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from inbox.dpdk.org (inbox.dpdk.org [95.142.172.178]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8822440B98 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 78C25456A3; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:11 +0200 (CEST) From: bugzilla@dpdk.org To: dev@dpdk.org Subject: [DPDK/DTS Bug 1500] Create process for adding VFs Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 18:48:10 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: DPDK X-Bugzilla-Component: DTS X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jspewock@iol.unh.edu X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dev@dpdk.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version rep_platform op_sys bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=17219332910.Bdfa.3177690 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All MIME-Version: 1.0 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 --17219332910.Bdfa.3177690 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1500 Bug ID: 1500 Summary: Create process for adding VFs Product: DPDK Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: Normal Component: DTS Assignee: dev@dpdk.org Reporter: jspewock@iol.unh.edu CC: juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, probb@iol.unh.edu Target Milestone: --- VFs are used in multiple of the ethdev test suites that we were planning to port over into new DTS, but we don't have a method of creating them current= ly. Judging by the process that is laid out in multiple test_plans (like stats_check for example: https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dts/tree/test_plans/stats_checks_test_plan.rst) = it seems like actually creating the VF and binding it to vfio-pci is pretty simple. However, because the VFs are on top of the PF that exist on the NIC= 's ports, it raises a few questions about where VFs should live in the framewo= rk and how they should be managed, since they get their own PCI addresses. It might be enough to just add VFs as a list of objects under a port and ma= nage them that way, but they almost look like ports themselves to testpmd and devbind. Also, since we currently start testpmd by explicitly allowing the = PCI addresses for the ports in the current testrun, do we also include all VFs configured on the ports? Do we always want testpmd to see them if they are configured? There are a few things to discuss regarding how to implement th= em properly. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= --17219332910.Bdfa.3177690 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:48:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Bug ID 1500
Summary Create process for adding VFs
Product DPDK
Version unspecified
Hardware All
OS All
Status UNCONFIRMED
Severity normal
Priority Normal
Component DTS
Assignee dev@dpdk.org
Reporter jspewock@iol.unh.edu
CC juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, probb@iol.unh.edu
Target Milestone --- 

VFs are used in multiple of the et=
hdev test suites that we were planning to
port over into new DTS, but we don't have a method of creating them current=
ly.
Judging by the process that is laid out in multiple test_plans (like
stats_check for example:
https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dts/tree/test_plans/stats_checks_test=
_plan.rst) it
seems like actually creating the VF and binding it to vfio-pci is pretty
simple. However, because the VFs are on top of the PF that exist on the NIC=
's
ports, it raises a few questions about where VFs should live in the framewo=
rk
and how they should be managed, since they get their own PCI addresses.

It might be enough to just add VFs as a list of objects under a port and ma=
nage
them that way, but they almost look like ports themselves to testpmd and
devbind. Also, since we currently start testpmd by explicitly allowing the =
PCI
addresses for the ports in the current testrun, do we also include all VFs
configured on the ports? Do we always want testpmd to see them if they are
configured? There are a few things to discuss regarding how to implement th=
em
properly.

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20
= --17219332910.Bdfa.3177690--