From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914B5425CC; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:08:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3D4402E2; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:08:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310A540263; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:08:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com (smartserver.smartsharesys.local [192.168.4.10]) by dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7F21205FB; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:08:18 +0200 (CEST) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Process for adding a new driver? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:08:16 +0200 Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D87BB8@smartserver.smartshare.dk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Process for adding a new driver? Thread-Index: Adnp/uWlNcDSdLyMSDqCdg+FuICvvQ== From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= To: , Cc: , "Ferruh Yigit" , , "Christian Koue Muf" , "Renyong Wan" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Dear DPDK tech board, The process for adding a new library to DPDK is well documented [1]. What is the process for adding a new (NIC) driver? It seems like the task of reviewing NIC PMDs from vendors other than = Broadcom/Intel/Marvell/NVIDIA falls entirely on the next-net tree = maintainers, Ferruh and Andrew, which doesn't seem like a reasonable = burden. The Napatech driver is too large for Ferruh to review, which in my = opinion [2] is an unreasonable argument for not accepting it. And the 3SNIC driver got no attention by any reviewers [3]. (Although = Stephen did provide some basic feedback after they polled for review.) Overall, I think we should put much more trust in hardware vendors to = provide high quality drivers for their hardware. We want vendors to = upstream their drivers, with all the benefits of having the code public. = If we make it too difficult, they will simply keep their drivers private = instead. @Maxime: I propose to put this on the agenda for the coming techboard = meeting. [1]: https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/new_library.html [2]: = http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D87BAF@smartser= ver.smartshare.dk/ [3]: = http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/6df9c00f-23a0-423f-840b-4ecf20ff82fc@3snic.com/= Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards, -Morten Br=F8rup