Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] QoS features on i40e - Linux kernel divergence

["Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>]

Hi Vincent,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vincent JARDIN [mailto:vincent.jardin@6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 5:14 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo; Stephen Hemminger
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] QoS features on i40e - Linux kernel
> divergence
> 
> Le 24/02/2017 à 08:23, Lu, Wenzhuo a écrit :
> >> It is good to allow setting QoS on device, but it looks like this is
> >> a device specific API, not a generic PMD function. I don't think any
> >> feature in DPDK should be hardcoded to one device type.
> > Yes, they're private APIs.
> > Normally we want to support kernel PF + dpdk VF. As there's no PF - VF
> interface defined for QoS, These features cannot be implemented on VF now.
> > Have to put them on PF, and let PF play as a controller.
> > There's discussion about if we should rich PF host features. So, I put these
> functions to rte_pmd_i40e.h to show they're experimental and temporary
> features.
> >
> > There's another thread started by Cristian for a generic QoS solution. After it's
> accepted and the PF-VF interfaces are defined by kernel driver. We can use a
> generic solution to replace this one.
> 
> Same, DPDK continues to diverge from the Linux kernel for PF capabilities. Intel
> did commit previously that you'll do some works for proper PF support into the
> kernel to avoid it. It is not happening. So, I would rather keep nack'ing such
> series unless:
>    - either it is under experimental compilation option
Yes, they're experimental. I put the functions in the rte_pmd_i40e.h. All the functions in this file are announced experimental.

>    - either it is showing up into the kernel
We're discussing this internally in parallel.

> 
> Best regards,
>    Vincent