From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-f174.google.com (mail-ot0-f174.google.com [74.125.82.174]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C39E201 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 04:16:09 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ot0-f174.google.com with SMTP id x37so48594635ota.2 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:16:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AoJZrffJ6YLR9vKcthB9kdur2Y3ZFbb1UFKIS9VtWvk=; b=V1tTaH64phfWMV2YSMmZP6UjyWEo7i/Ji2woGfj2gKU7F7Z98+Ec+3WAcKYtLV5BU2 1I+j0Zh76v4HHuO0ZKuVYjOwGFiLy66ZImMuPiEPR6kW9Olbd3vZjHiGlr9+bypk12FY 6nv1Doi89jE5uQif6bMFfs3vk9Ek9hrR/+LiC3KaI4WFdFPgQxYV6xryCjQ4HRFQ7wlR 5rCVnpWreupywimO8NnnPeHWUKbROMfmFOAMXmLgPB19vjcXt8BHlk0rKqA+h2epIIap 3ffxV5vdpau2Yy7EaDnm4ijVCmDvKqj/w1LIGWSPe3D3vL54r2FX7OxbcfGvWE7nIcfZ BrBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AoJZrffJ6YLR9vKcthB9kdur2Y3ZFbb1UFKIS9VtWvk=; b=No9zgPeBNUcHp77uIM+4d6eEyQrI0tLBcddC+YRpcI3MbA63eM5t0f6MSljPQPXvwu lW5Pq+R0iNmpasVa/5wta3z1X1BmrxLCvUfIxsqzGeDf8vgHZ3jgAxnxUHRsqVYsWU0F 0NLFLGQQIwHzu2FKtEfhPZAE5AZ3jn5tFNXD4Wlmh3hSC6h42+zyrmJPCCiT4cJkTFYt +xOQ1CLZUxZeNd/W+8r1bAGNhuS2iq8GxS++ey3POKTZIk/2yz2u1GhKZlxCQNbZzXb3 pbuTr/gDjiHqHeYzWqZlwyHFVaT5Z3vQR8ozPjJK4OW9x9hcn8Bk1KZjs97MFJFhCQRO 0Pyg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H09BF463zJxSs+C1c6uc+UPoBIkDoRm9qKbaSRSAbP17GS6CV46/UuegpQaBmJpVC5ovpbI6YHfhRGLXw== X-Received: by 10.157.82.91 with SMTP id q27mr5381589otg.50.1489029368844; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:16:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.251.129 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 19:16:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170308141658.GA292076@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20170308141658.GA292076@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> From: raman geetha gopalakrishnan Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:46:08 +0530 Message-ID: To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 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: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 03:16:09 -0000 Thanks a lot Bruce to correct my assumption. This was what i looked for. Thanks Raman On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:05:03PM +0530, raman geetha gopalakrishnan > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I have the following basic question. Hope to get an answer / link where i > > can get myself clear. > > > > 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. > > > > 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? > > No, that assumption is not correct, which is the reason we have so many > NIC drivers in DPDK. Each NIC uses a different method of talking to SW, > both in terms of the registers needed to be accessed to initialize the > NIC and then in terms of the metadata format used to receive or transmit > packets. > > Regards, > /Bruce > > > > > B) if #A is correct , how can i make changes to PMD to support any > NIC > > ? > > > > if i have to put the above question in different way then it is > > > > 2. what is preventing us from having a common PMD layer for all NICs and > > additional PMD specific to each NIC??? > > > > Thanks > > Raman >