From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f177.google.com (mail-pf0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8509576 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 04:57:26 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pf0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 78so234194020pfw.2 for ; Tue, 05 Jan 2016 19:57:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igel-co-jp.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=G8QkgN48HbT5jVvGg8zzcDK6YncfexYnFnoYhLrylpo=; b=v/CzYwgBFzhYldLGXv7RhWkEXUY6KuIkfonHczpNbfXk40nI+XZhTGv0Bsp/EJ+I2q 1IIk2KdCjCJLyRjL/SYBIJPz9Tdt1Z1vxpvf1Idm5YXWA3Jk1UgrwTATYZ0EakJfmCdY tgHcrO5lEp/gpsDgsZSF5v5ZoM6BxVySVpa0rXK4SNzkQX2x/5dArbS/4+bv02430TvJ Dhw56XqxOpKZ6iYxBH38izwS6ZqO4HgtgMCY4CK7oq594WsJ6b/p0tsHDCAx3PpzHmYY /0S+0UlHON8fMzaXO52DDfymFw0CWTmXmps7iLzGSbpxRjUW+gM+gEOzEDMNMHYaqCts NFKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=G8QkgN48HbT5jVvGg8zzcDK6YncfexYnFnoYhLrylpo=; b=UvyD5XqMh/QRcIEjdkhW2jG/cI/z+X1ugxVHgfPV0LkVTMRVrodJYOYO5nx3KQ1UoH DIDKiv+tcfNF6WG6Nwh4d/eq1bJuRzP9VlZu+ys9Pd+13g6OZ+3J21xzRr04AWnejMhO HaPlHyaKFYOpbQ85uDPpzpHmikJ1PA9RIQZi//9kt5r6dpkQR0qMZPYtibmszDjz/VDG WQc9x/EsRVB0a9VqAjiX6FE26n3xFY5IS/nCN0GMvoyW3DYie+IQfu+tm6PXI2yfLP/i ZllAH+s2rx25DGAOfwEX/Qd8ZNFe1rZ+vEF9k7f/govT8K/VDZkmvOBbeH72ymoBggBz r4NA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn20YpxaCV0yRVdXplEghSFXg8QjITtgBm4HHeHrWjephL6eeLvpt2F7Ffnds2zUmQ23LisPNdbWEbUvR61bQgnnHQgcA== X-Received: by 10.98.18.206 with SMTP id 75mr129120931pfs.91.1452052645536; Tue, 05 Jan 2016 19:57:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.16.129.101] (napt.igel.co.jp. [219.106.231.132]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t15sm9482610pfi.26.2016.01.05.19.57.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 05 Jan 2016 19:57:25 -0800 (PST) To: "Tan, Jianfeng" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <1447930650-26023-2-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp> <1450255049-2263-1-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp> <568117AB.1080605@igel.co.jp> From: Tetsuya Mukawa X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <568C90A7.9040503@igel.co.jp> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:57:27 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <568117AB.1080605@igel.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "nakajima.yoshihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "mst@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/2] Virtio-net PMD Extension to work on host 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: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:57:26 -0000 On 2015/12/28 20:06, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote: > On 2015/12/24 23:05, Tan, Jianfeng wrote: >> Hi Tetsuya, >> >> After several days' studying your patch, I have some questions as follows: >> >> 1. Is physically-contig memory really necessary? >> This is a too strong requirement IMHO. IVSHMEM doesn't require this in its original meaning. So how do you think of >> Huawei Xie's idea of using virtual address for address translation? (In addition, virtual address of mem_table could be >> different in application and QTest, but this can be addressed because SET_MEM_TABLE msg will be intercepted by >> QTest) > Hi Jianfeng, > > Thanks for your suggestion. > Huawei's idea may solve contig-mem restriction. > Let me have time to check it more. Hi Jianfeng, I made sure we can remove the restriction with Huawei's idea. One thing I concern is below. If we don't use contiguous memory, this PMD will not work with other 'physical' PMDs like e1000 PMD, virtio-net PMD, and etc. (This is because allocated memory may not be physically contiguous.) One of examples is that if we implement like above, in QEMU guest, we can handle a host NIC directly, but in container, we will not be able to handle the device. This will be a restriction for this virtual addressing changing. Do you know an use case that the user wants to handle 'physical' PMD and 'virtual' virtio-net PMD together? Tetsuya,