From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369522BC7 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:05:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Aug 2017 02:05:47 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.41,342,1498546800"; d="scan'208";a="116839282" Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Aug 2017 02:05:46 -0700 Received: from irsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.3) by IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:05:46 +0100 Received: from irsmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.187]) by irsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.14.182]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:05:46 +0100 From: "Burakov, Anatoly" To: Furong , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Why IVSHMEM was removed since 16.11 ? Thread-Index: AQHTEBfaAHn2doBt70OsOT0qlHLA+6J6KSdw Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 09:05:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: <2f4bdab7-9873-e293-26fd-36ef5f2d80a1@126.com> In-Reply-To: <2f4bdab7-9873-e293-26fd-36ef5f2d80a1@126.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiN2ViYzkwYjYtNzRkZS00MWJjLWE4YzMtMzYyYzkwOTlmNDhhIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjUuOS4zIiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IlNWeWsxc2cyKzhwVHVxNTlxQm5WVWNQSWFcL3c2NVNHdnFQVWJBamJHZmVBPSJ9 dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Why IVSHMEM was removed since 16.11 ? 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: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 09:05:49 -0000 > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Furong > Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 8:26 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Why IVSHMEM was removed since 16.11 ? >=20 > The release notes of dpdk-16.11 had shown that IVSHMEM was removed > due to some design issues. >=20 > So, what are these issues? >=20 > Thanks! >=20 Hi Furong, There were multiple issues involved. Biggest of all, it required a patch to= QEMU that wasn't maintained and wasn't upstream (i.e. vanilla QEMU didn't = work with DPDK's implementation of IVSHMEM support). Second, it was basical= ly hacked in to EAL in order to support what it does [1], and the engineeri= ng effort to fix all of that isn't worth the benefit it would provide, as n= o one appeared to be using it heavily enough to object to its deprecation. Hope this clears things up. [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-June/040844.html Thanks, Anatoly=20