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

[Ravi Kerur <rkerur@gmail.com>]

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
> > ...
>
> This is an Intel driver so you should ask to the responsible of this code
> at Intel.
> The problem is that there is not really an identified responsible for this
> driver.
>
> The rule is to not change the base driver, even osdep files.
> But it would be better to have an exception here.
>
>
> PS: please avoid top-posting.
>

<rk> Please let me know who is the contact person from Intel so I can add
him/her to "To" list when I send the patch or Should I contact Jim St Leger
and ask him about this?

Thanks.

>
> > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Ravi Kerur <rkerur@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Inline <rk>
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Thomas Monjalon <
> > > thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> 2015-01-04 15:28, Ravi Kerur:
> > >> > We have a Gigabyte H97N motherboard which has I217 Intel chipset
> which
> > >> uses
> > >> > e100e drivers. I looked into lib/librte_pmd_e1000 directory and I
> do see
> > >> > that e1000e code is integrated but missing some support for
> read/write
> > >> from
> > >> > flash_address and other minor things. I have made changes shown
> below
> > >> and
> > >> > have done some testing with testpmd utility and now have following
> > >> questions
> > >> >
> > >> > 1. What amount of testing is required to qualify patch as
> successfully
> > >> > tested on new chipsets
> > >>
> > >> There is no good answer to this question. Generally, you must be sure
> that
> > >> you don't break anything.
> > >> So you must test the code paths you have changed.
> > >>
> > >
> > > <rk> yes I have done testing on Ubuntu for I217 using testpmd.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> > 2. FreeBSD testing, currently we have Ubuntu 14.04 installed on
> existing
> > >> > H97N motherboard and testing is done solely on Linux. We plan to get
> > >> > another motherboard which will have I218 chipset and still deciding
> > >> whether
> > >> > to go with FreeBSD or Ubuntu. So the question I have is what amount
> of
> > >> > testing should be done on FreeBSD? I don't think
> > >> setup.sh/dpdk_nic_bind.py
> > >> > works on FreeBSD yet hence the question on testing.
> > >>
> > >> FreeBSD testing is required when patching common EAL, scripts or
> > >> makefiles.
> > >>
> > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_api.c          | 21
> > >> +++++++++++++++++++++
> > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_api.h          |  1 +
> > >> > >  lib/librte_pmd_e1000/e1000/e1000_osdep.h        | 24
> > >> +++++++++++++++++++-----
> > >>
> > >> These files are part of the base driver.
> > >> The rule is to not patch them and try to do the changes in PMD only.
> > >> There can be exceptions if an Intel maintainer acknowledges it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > <rk>  Changes in these files are modifying existing macros
> > >
> > > E1000_READ_FLASH_REG,
> > > E1000_WRITE_FLASH_REG
> > > ...
> > >
> > > If it is not recommended to modify these files, should I move macros
> into
> > > some PMD file?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
>
>