From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>,
Helin Zhang <helin.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] slow data path communication between DPDK port and Linux
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:26:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E934E5.4080905@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E917AD.2060701@redhat.com>
On 3/16/2016 8:22 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 03/16/2016 10:19 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 3/16/2016 7:26 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>> On 03/14/2016 05:32 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2016 11:17 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>>> This patch sent to keep record of latest status of the work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is slow data path communication implementation based on existing KNI.
>>>>>
>>>>> Difference is: librte_kni converted into a PMD, kdp kernel module is almost
>>>>> same except all control path functionality removed and some simplification done.
>>>>>
>>>>> Motivation is to simplify slow path data communication.
>>>>> Now any application can use this new PMD to send/get data to Linux kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> PMD supports two communication methods:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) KDP kernel module
>>>>> PMD initialization functions handles creating virtual interfaces (with help of
>>>>> kdp kernel module) and created FIFO. FIFO is used to share data between
>>>>> userspace and kernelspace. This is default method.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) tun/tap module
>>>>> When KDP module is not inserted, PMD creates tap interface and transfers
>>>>> packets using tap interface.
>>>>>
>>>>> In long term this patch intends to replace the KNI and KNI will be
>>>>> depreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Self-NACK: Will work on another option that does not introduce new
>>>> kernel module.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, care to elaborate a bit? The second mode of this PMD already was
>>> free of external kernel modules. Do you mean you'll be just removing
>>> mode 1) from the PMD or looking at something completely different?
>>>
>>> Just thinking that tun/tap PMD sounds like a useful thing to have, I
>>> hope you're not abandoning that.
>>>
>>
>> It will be KNI PMD.
>> Plan is to have something like KDP, but with existing KNI kernel module.
>> There will be tun/tap support as fallback.
>
> Hum, now I'm confused. I was under the impression everybody hated KNI
> and wanted to get rid of it, and certainly not build future solutions on
> top of it?
>
We can't remove it.
We can't replace/improve it -you were one of the major opposition to this.
This doesn't leave more option other than using it.
There won't be any update in KNI kernel module, library + sample app
will be converted into PMD.
Regards,
ferruh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-16 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-27 16:32 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH " Ferruh Yigit
2016-01-27 16:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] kdp: add kernel data path kernel module Ferruh Yigit
2016-02-08 17:14 ` Reshma Pattan
2016-02-09 10:53 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-01-27 16:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] kdp: add virtual PMD for kernel slow data path communication Ferruh Yigit
2016-01-28 8:16 ` Xu, Qian Q
2016-01-29 16:04 ` Yigit, Ferruh
2016-02-09 17:33 ` Reshma Pattan
2016-02-09 17:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-02-19 5:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] slow data path communication between DPDK port and Linux Ferruh Yigit
2016-02-19 5:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] kdp: add kernel data path kernel module Ferruh Yigit
2016-02-19 5:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] kdp: add virtual PMD for kernel slow data path communication Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-09 11:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] slow data path communication between DPDK port and Linux Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-09 11:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] kdp: add kernel data path kernel module Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-09 11:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] kdp: add virtual PMD for kernel slow data path communication Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-14 15:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] slow data path communication between DPDK port and Linux Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-16 7:26 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-03-16 8:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-16 8:22 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-03-16 10:26 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2016-03-16 10:45 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-16 11:07 ` Mcnamara, John
2016-03-16 11:13 ` Ferruh Yigit
2016-03-16 13:23 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-03-16 13:15 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-03-16 13:58 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-16 15:03 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-03-16 15:15 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-16 11:07 ` Bruce Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56E934E5.4080905@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=pmatilai@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).