Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel chipsets.

[Ravi Kerur <rkerur@gmail.com>]

Intel team,

Please let me know what additional testing needs to be done for I217/I218?
I have confined changes only to _osdep_ files and have done basic testing
with testpmd utility. Since DPDK PMD driver supporting e1000e  has been
available for quite sometime, I have assumed basic testing for Tx/Rx
packets should suffice.

Thanks,
Ravi

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin <
konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 11:32 AM
> > To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Cc: Ravi Kerur; Thomas Monjalon; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel chipsets.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:08:46AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 10:53 AM
> > > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > > Cc: Ravi Kerur; Thomas Monjalon; dev@dpdk.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel
> chipsets.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:54:52PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ravi Kerur
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 8:34 PM
> > > > > > To: Thomas Monjalon
> > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Q on Support for I217 and I218 Intel
> chipsets.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Thomas Monjalon <
> thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2015-01-09 04:41, Ravi Kerur:
> > > > > > > > Thomas,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please let me know how I can move forward on this. If i
> confine changes
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > e1000/ directory to e1000_osdep.h file only and the rest in
> PMD will that
> > > > > > > > work? The reason I ask is because of following comment  in
> README file.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > Few changes to the original FreeBSD sources were made to:
> > > > > > > > - Adopt it for PMD usage mode:
> > > > > > > >         e1000_osdep.c
> > > > > > > >         e1000_osdep.h
> > > > > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, if needed you can modify these files.
> > > > > In fact, these files are the only 2 that are allowed to be
> modified inside e1000 sub-directory.
> > > > > As I understand you plan to implement E1000_READ_FLASH_REG  and
> E1000_WRITE_FLASH_REG
> > > > > macros properly, correct?
> > > > > Konstantin
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As a cleanup we should really look to move these two files out of
> the e1000
> > > > subdirectory (and similarly for the ixgbe versions etc.), so as to
> give a cleaner
> > > > and more manageable separation between what can be edited or not.
> > >
> > > It was always like that for all Intel PMDs we have:
> > >
> > > $ find lib/ -name '*_osdep.*' | grep -v acl
> > > lib/librte_pmd_vmxnet3/vmxnet3/vmxnet3_osdep.h
> > > lib/librte_pmd_ixgbe/ixgbe/ixgbe_osdep.h
> > > lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/ethtool/ixgbe/ixgbe_osdep.h
> > > lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/ethtool/igb/e1000_osdep.h
> > > lib/librte_pmd_i40e/i40e/i40e_osdep.h
> > > lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_osdep.c
> > > lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_osdep.h
> > >
> > > As I understand ND has it's own version of <drvname>_osdep.* for each
> OS they support.
> > > We obviously modify it to fit DPDK purposes.
> > >
> > > Konstantin
> > >
> > > >
> > > > /Bruce
> >
> > Yep. Doesn't mean we haven't put it in the wrong place though! :-)
>
> We just don't move it at all :)
> It is at the same place where ND puts it, we just modify the contents.
> From my point - current location is perfectly ok.
> Konstantin
>
> >
> > /Bruce
>