From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>
Received: from mail-oi0-f51.google.com (mail-oi0-f51.google.com
 [209.85.218.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 845F9C492
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:40:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by oies66 with SMTP id s66so35326764oie.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
 :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=EwnYaNllFq4WqeCStb6R1pW8iW+8g/EMMR7JM40420c=;
 b=lKCueZUdw2HiwoqdqUyWmMkMnsLu2hQcrC6lPEOO/iTnV6FnjR7gg0EfSHTnEuPbYc
 zQR26mO6ucf7gb6LSLvAUQlVI+J+krp6ktwPL21f3XNi32qiimV+EPpuC1RG25fuYThR
 Myve/zvtKuXalFU/m5y/qxch1MlxqdpG1oxmbu2ilHml+HyaQqlKqUo8lWVAqjDlqrNO
 N+DEVxro14CQoGMNXyfA3dJEAPwmIbFW/XOeanGqgknCXLGm412ocSLB0kROJLotpiYN
 CFTzMU+JsaWtesYtMwuL6kzRsLpxVAqN02dPEsi++s9uDsgGwWurJ60iV8s/zhVDT9Mo
 RDPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlbJ5bogVHO29UWOgBq23GUnFhZLKHavv8Ds5S83bCzhJhm4SgI3KsDL1tcZufWEjdrOVca
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.210.201 with SMTP id j192mr6902520oig.130.1445456436855; 
 Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.11.10 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1729488.TmXe30SXlp@xps13>
References: <1444992324-5504-1-git-send-email-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>
 <2304404.uKjJZErY2S@xps13>
 <CAD+H993aWa1=fb2Dts9roLYwUwew-oa+x8zEg7MEy-kjcq5PmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1729488.TmXe30SXlp@xps13>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 20:40:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CAD+H990AZ9b20hCBdYULT2sSESJmXOzsBCYsfwfJyTOTG=apJA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] nfp-uio: new uio driver for netronome
 nfp6000 card
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:40:38 -0000

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
wrote:

> 2015-10-21 16:57, Alejandro Lucero:
> > I understand interest for not having another UIO driver does exist. We
> > could maintain an external nfp_uio by now till either we get rid of it or
> > we definitely find out it is really needed. any chance to accept nfp_uio
> by
> > now?
>
> No, there are some work currently to get rid of igb_uio.
> So there are little chances to accept nfp_uio one day.
> Please take the first step of integrating your PMD without link interrupt.
> Later we'll be able to discuss how to mitigate the interrupt issue.
>

Ok. I will create a new patchset version without nfp_uio.

By the way, that work with igb_uio is about the patches to pci_uio_generic?
I thought there was some reticence from the maintainer for adding pci bus
master there.