From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B1BF2BB2 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:17:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Feb 2017 07:17:38 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,215,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="69565580" Received: from fmsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.201]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Feb 2017 07:17:38 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx116.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.20) by FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 07:17:38 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.17]) by fmsmsx116.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.162]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 07:17:38 -0800 From: "Wiles, Keith" To: "Legacy, Allain (Wind River)" CC: Vincent JARDIN , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" , Olivier MATZ Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/16] Wind River Systems AVP PMD Thread-Index: AQHSkGPy3uwyMrmgX0CZvp/FTR5YuaF9E46AgAA4BACAADMCAA== Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:17:37 +0000 Message-ID: <59255C09-E65D-4F57-8C25-E35663265906@intel.com> References: <1487985795-136044-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <1488136143-116389-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <06f382a8-b177-fc58-945e-eab6f23639b0@6wind.com> <70A7408C6E1BFB41B192A929744D85238A757B6D@ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com> In-Reply-To: <70A7408C6E1BFB41B192A929744D85238A757B6D@ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.254.190.36] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <74B9670EAFB7724C800ADA970C40923F@intel.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/16] Wind River Systems AVP PMD X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:17:40 -0000 > On Feb 27, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Legacy, Allain = wrote: >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Vincent JARDIN [mailto:vincent.jardin@6wind.com] > ... >> So, before spending too much time in reviewing your long serie, I think = that >> proper statements are needed. In the past, other NICs using Qemu have >> been sent, but they were avoided since virtio solved all the issues. >>=20 > Ok, I'll put together some additional information. Should I resubmit the= patch series with an updated cover letter, update the NIC guide doc, or ju= st reply to this thread? >=20 > So is the intent to only have a single qemu based device/driver then? I= f so, why? Allain, I think the best information is not really performance, big is a go= od way to prove its worth. If you can list the advantages and differences with AVP would help understand why someone would like to u= se AVP. Even if the performance was same it may have many other advantages that wou= ld be good to include in DPDK. All that said I do not think we should be limiting PMDs in DPDK just becaus= e they look similar to some other PMD. They are taking ownership of the mai= ntenance of the PMD and if for some reason the PMD becomes not maintained t= hen we can discuss removing the PMD later. We have a number of PMDs now tha= t perform the same function only in a different way, which seems just fine = with everyone. Just my $0.02 worth. >=20 Regards, Keith