Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel chipsets.

["Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ravi Kerur
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 8:34 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel chipsets.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > 2015-01-09 04:41, Ravi Kerur:
> > > Thomas,
> > >
> > > Please let me know how I can move forward on this. If i confine changes
> > in
> > > e1000/ directory to e1000_osdep.h file only and the rest in PMD will that
> > > work? The reason I ask is because of following comment  in README file.
> > >
> > > ...
> > > Few changes to the original FreeBSD sources were made to:
> > > - Adopt it for PMD usage mode:
> > >         e1000_osdep.c
> > >         e1000_osdep.h
> > > ...

Yes, if needed you can modify these files.
In fact, these files are the only 2 that are allowed to be modified inside e1000 sub-directory.
As I understand you plan to implement E1000_READ_FLASH_REG  and E1000_WRITE_FLASH_REG
macros properly, correct?
Konstantin

> >
> > This is an Intel driver so you should ask to the responsible of this code
> > at Intel.
> > The problem is that there is not really an identified responsible for this
> > driver.
> >
> > The rule is to not change the base driver, even osdep files.
> > But it would be better to have an exception here.
> >
> >
> > PS: please avoid top-posting.
> >
> 
> <rk> Please let me know who is the contact person from Intel so I can add
> him/her to "To" list when I send the patch or Should I contact Jim St Leger
> and ask him about this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> >
> > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Ravi Kerur <rkerur@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Inline <rk>
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Thomas Monjalon <
> > > > thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> 2015-01-04 15:28, Ravi Kerur:
> > > >> > We have a Gigabyte H97N motherboard which has I217 Intel chipset
> > which
> > > >> uses
> > > >> > e100e drivers. I looked into lib/librte_pmd_e1000 directory and I
> > do see
> > > >> > that e1000e code is integrated but missing some support for
> > read/write
> > > >> from
> > > >> > flash_address and other minor things. I have made changes shown
> > below
> > > >> and
> > > >> > have done some testing with testpmd utility and now have following
> > > >> questions
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 1. What amount of testing is required to qualify patch as
> > successfully
> > > >> > tested on new chipsets
> > > >>
> > > >> There is no good answer to this question. Generally, you must be sure
> > that
> > > >> you don't break anything.
> > > >> So you must test the code paths you have changed.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > <rk> yes I have done testing on Ubuntu for I217 using testpmd.
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> > 2. FreeBSD testing, currently we have Ubuntu 14.04 installed on
> > existing
> > > >> > H97N motherboard and testing is done solely on Linux. We plan to get
> > > >> > another motherboard which will have I218 chipset and still deciding
> > > >> whether
> > > >> > to go with FreeBSD or Ubuntu. So the question I have is what amount
> > of
> > > >> > testing should be done on FreeBSD? I don't think
> > > >> setup.sh/dpdk_nic_bind.py
> > > >> > works on FreeBSD yet hence the question on testing.
> > > >>
> > > >> FreeBSD testing is required when patching common EAL, scripts or
> > > >> makefiles.
> > > >>
> > > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_api.c          | 21
> > > >> +++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_api.h          |  1 +
> > > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_osdep.h        | 24
> > > >> +++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > >>
> > > >> These files are part of the base driver.
> > > >> The rule is to not patch them and try to do the changes in PMD only.
> > > >> There can be exceptions if an Intel maintainer acknowledges it.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > <rk>  Changes in these files are modifying existing macros
> > > >
> > > > E1000_READ_FLASH_REG,
> > > > E1000_WRITE_FLASH_REG
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > If it is not recommended to modify these files, should I move macros
> > into
> > > > some PMD file?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> >
> >