From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Cc: "Patrick Robb" <probb@iol.unh.edu>,
"Aaron Conole" <aconole@redhat.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: update minimum Linux kernel version
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:22:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240216092201.530fb1af@hermes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F223@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:47 +0100
Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> > Sent: Friday, 16 February 2024 04.05
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 23:38:07 +0100
> > Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, 11 January 2024 20.55
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 20:26:56 +0100
> > > > Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > When the documentation specifies a minimum required kernel
> > version,
> > > > it implicitly claims that DPDK works with that kernel version.
> > > > >
> > > > > So we should either test with the specified kernel version (which
> > > > requires significant effort to set up, so I’m not going to ask for
> > > > it!), or add a big fat disclaimer/warning that DPDK is not tested
> > with
> > > > the mentioned kernel version, and list the kernel versions actually
> > > > tested.
> > > >
> > > > It is much less of an issue than it used to be since there should
> > be no
> > > > need for
> > > > DPDK specific kernel components. The kernel API/ABI is stable
> > across
> > > > releases
> > > > (with the notable exception of BPF). Therefore the DPDK kernel
> > version
> > > > dependency
> > > > is much less than it used to be.
> >
> > There are three issues here:
> >
> > 1. Supporting out of date kernel also means supporting out of date
> > build environments
> > that maybe missing headers. The recent example was the TAP device
> > requiring (or cloning
> > which is worse) the headers to the FLOWER classifier. If we move
> > the kernel version
> > to current LTS, then FLOWER is always present.
> > 2. Supporting out of date kernel means more test infrastructure. Some
> > CI needs to build
> > test on older environments.
> > 3. The place it impacts current CI is the building on CentOS7. CentOS7
> > is end of life
> > do we have to keep it? The compiler also lack good C11 support so
> > not sure how CI keeps working.
> >
> > The way I view it, if you are on an old system, then stick to old DPDK
> > LTS version.
> > We don't want to here about regressions on end of life systems.
>
> The system requirements in the Getting Started Guide [1] says:
>
> Kernel version >= 4.14
> The kernel version required is based on the oldest long term stable kernel available at kernel.org when the DPDK version is in development.
> Compatibility for recent distribution kernels will be kept, notably RHEL/CentOS 7.
We need to drop CentOS 7 soon.
https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/linux/centos-linux-eol
CentOS Linux 7 will reach end of life (EOL) on June 30, 2024.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-16 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-10 16:57 Stephen Hemminger
2024-01-11 9:18 ` Morten Brørup
2024-01-11 18:48 ` Aaron Conole
2024-01-11 19:02 ` Patrick Robb
2024-01-11 19:26 ` Morten Brørup
2024-01-11 19:50 ` Patrick Robb
2024-01-11 19:54 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-01-11 22:38 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-16 3:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-02-16 8:29 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-16 17:22 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2024-02-16 17:42 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-02-17 19:48 ` Patrick Robb
2024-07-29 20:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2024-07-30 23:27 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-07-30 23:40 ` [PATCH] doc: no longer support end of life CentOS versions Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-19 15:34 ` Thomas Monjalon
2024-11-19 18:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-19 19:38 ` Thomas Monjalon
2024-11-19 23:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Stephen Hemminger
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=20240216092201.530fb1af@hermes.local \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=probb@iol.unh.edu \
/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).