From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com (mail-wm0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D90C2B97 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:05:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f45.google.com with SMTP id o80so83326854wme.1 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 03:05:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oWUiE7Q+M4tEp0E1c6TgBTYawdzpPNt7vlDFCoZ1EtI=; b=OW2J9ztLf9+/C74L2JSQyZl0QS6GwyEcpIbt0dAR0A975QesUXdA6Wu+qB2oF/cUNf AE2U3OrMFMNeVmFDDnExq18U18R4weYDpX1+rOFwe0j56FjBrfa72O7/ERbkk2V8LHO7 IimOTZpw5w3jZVJaRuGQjEm7k9FWWklFKQJjXINvDacFpSGP08+MATpY70U51V2LX5TY c5OShwbgyoIjfAg4cxj9fRSqWu9CE/6CoEnOhNP7IH4r8pduy60/MFu+lgSymz+dOjTI 5JlfnO6cr86nIargdvAYiq9iWreWAH8+SStmwgee+unuaEDoG8k0axU1qd4X79nKl4zF ukDg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oWUiE7Q+M4tEp0E1c6TgBTYawdzpPNt7vlDFCoZ1EtI=; b=JxGqv9gip6DwscpwjwOkt1Z0GmeimU2KVLrZobgtJ+ISo3lBpxpFXyPixYSCqgH16W dnQNKs0ROX0HNxikhfSM+5yBz9sjeGOny9zvI8SyxSR80Cys6WCigAwolfU+RE+jBm8Q xpJYl191XCjhrXpfepEBsY/9mF5pbvqcMLwWlKp63PCzZKIl+qzZ3GhlncI9zDh7j74u WdpkUP5hLfyA2os/+ckhdeOnHjMFGx1795eU4tMXq4k3ih9kEiHFTslKt6djSZrYNW4J 5EnaHhOd5ophiMX85pWh2QlwT98ocKKAlhT7r+gJaooYe/l+1trO5uuB+OTJPOteT8+4 pJZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMaVCwebTnsFAiFkGBEqN3Xxc3Y1y+xaJuqq2KiVhwL5MAB+mPQpLVmcWt1kPTBLezI X-Received: by 10.194.178.193 with SMTP id da1mr14136177wjc.66.1472465123375; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 03:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (229.202.154.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.154.202.229]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r127sm12682027wmf.23.2016.08.29.03.05.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Aug 2016 03:05:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Finn Christensen Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:04:11 +0200 Message-ID: <5255275.7GO0ucYScp@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <8cec6b8c3d6c4a7f85ac117d2d90fd7e@napatech.com> References: <20160826134401.19337-1-fc@napatech.com> <20160826095409.6d49a24a@xeon-e3> <8cec6b8c3d6c4a7f85ac117d2d90fd7e@napatech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ntnic: add PMD driver 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, 29 Aug 2016 10:05:23 -0000 2016-08-29 06:22, Finn Christensen: > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org] > > What is the license of this driver suite? > > The driver suite is a closed-source driver, which is not free downloadable. > > > IMHO the upstream DPDK shouldn't be a platform for non-free driver suites. > > This is our first steps towards opensource, and our upcoming NIC is > partly build on HW and SW from our Accelerator products. > And since we already bypasses the kernel effectively in our driver, > this first solution for a DPDK PMD driver, has been built on top of > that software suite. > We like the idea of opensource, but we will need to do the transition > stepwise, considering our NIC product. I think the first step should be to free the lowest level, here the code you build your drivers on. > We have seen large performance improvements (x4-x7 times with 64 byte > packets compared to a std NIC in a phy-ovs-vm-ovs-phy setup utilizing > a modified DPDK), and this is the main motivation to go forward and > try to push our contribution to DPDK upstream. > This is the first step of contributions that we want to make. > This DPDK PMD solution is not compileable unless you have our driver. Not being able to compile the PMD is a real problem for maintenance. The PMD would be considered as dead code, so is forbidden. > We may need to make that possible, so that a free downloadable driver > can be retrieved. > > Once this is said, we thought that the DPDK was BSD licensed and I must > admit that we have failed to see this limitation that you are mentioning. > Is there another license or agreement text that we need to read? Maybe you'll find some interesting parts in the contributing guide. But honestly, I think you have already done the right thing in your case: you sent some code and open the discussion :) Now you just need to enable a free compilation environment for your patch. Thanks