From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9061BBE for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:37:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Mar 2017 06:37:26 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,264,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="73710337" Received: from fmsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.202]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Mar 2017 06:37:26 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx156.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.74) by fmsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 06:37:26 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.172]) by fmsmsx156.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 06:37:26 -0800 From: "Wiles, Keith" To: "Yigit, Ferruh" CC: raman geetha gopalakrishnan , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Reg DPDK & PMD Thread-Index: AQHSmBDhI72pH8iAQE+TVAxwjnTjs6GLhacAgAADVYA= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:37:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <08e21158-c6bd-d390-8913-033f3f06bb8e@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <08e21158-c6bd-d390-8913-033f3f06bb8e@intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.255.71.106] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Reg DPDK & 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: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 14:37:28 -0000 > On Mar 8, 2017, at 8:25 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >=20 > On 3/8/2017 1:35 PM, raman geetha gopalakrishnan wrote: >> Hi All, >>=20 >> I have the following basic question. Hope to get an answer / link where = i >> can get myself clear. >>=20 >> 1. In DPDK PMD is optimized driver for an given NIC to get maximum >> performance. >> That being the case why we are talking about DPDK supported NICs. >>=20 >> A) My assumption is that NIC interface is standardized so that PMD >> should actually work with any NIC (barring some NIC specific performance >> tweaks) >> is that correct? >=20 > PMDs (Poll Mode Drivers) are _real_ device drivers, they are not an > optimization layer on top off a standardized interface, they deal > directly with hardware, so needs to be specific to hardware. >=20 >>=20 >> B) if #A is correct , how can i make changes to PMD to support any N= IC >> ? >>=20 >> if i have to put the above question in different way then it is >>=20 >> 2. what is preventing us from having a common PMD layer for all NICs and >> additional PMD specific to each NIC??? Another minor point is DPDK has a generic API layer for the ethernet NICs i= t is called ethdev with a set of standard APIs for the application. The PMD= s attached themselves to the ethdev using standardized APIs, which is about= as close we can get to a standard interface to PMDs/hardware. >>=20 >> Thanks >> Raman >>=20 >=20 Regards, Keith