From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com (mail-wm0-f66.google.com [74.125.82.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE3A39EA for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:17:35 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id r18so3874451wmd.3 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 08:17:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=nmu5+3bP7O6I4TIppLjIXNg8fcN3Fi0E9kCg2et1PYA=; b=qrpkyxusmA1klDV2VqAE45EeRGp/ZsdbBP8FQO4m7MgGYvkUjaYgsnyF3k7iaqHR3W fAnTvSNVBXXRpj+ITL0MTey3Ya8DWNwhNs/47MC1Bpc4WcACCSoQIEet5k+glwV6oVte gYt6GsPq8iP25veicgOkaDEzL6P/VpgDsptr35mrOMcFGcf5fva5uQEHyMqdl3uo5Hr/ pA5RNwdgWnQlSSk5fDrGpp2hXlQusmuZ3W70tmdR1BkjPLqL2FZmpNgQBIGhhEDjsbmK EGH5C9LAJumJuUsQyZtPQz6EDONwRvDoZJSc+WLVD3XOkot9CnzUJQX1kox+IKxBSoN/ SaJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nmu5+3bP7O6I4TIppLjIXNg8fcN3Fi0E9kCg2et1PYA=; b=F24uYr178/Ag0Wocrs3wDMFK1Z7wfORuKWFsNgtRdWPACkBeec8HTv5yT9smJaNste slu9xht3p+eyFzDkYq7bhTIgiwgNBt4qfPPM8b7CvE3qfyqHLpqcMXvOiNP8RTW7pRuj HQJQN0G7FbgkOlnKuCBJDIrOVW5XbZzDJj7gBSHA7jjMV13+pAralGnN6RBUluHd2D8e P+TK880rZwTdwbQMvSQ+om2QTfOkLNJmg8d8QPTH2pB+eGNrmbPfJg9gOQ4/WVrrsaKa jT8U+o8sFT1YPPaUT40tCnYm1Cw6Sp2k393IhFnH95Yt3nDA8BUvDDnphO1+bTciUnBN 99NA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nFCDfbkx8AJr8JFtMDqF7HeA7Xg0vjEcGIo13jLvM7BGSyjL82Pn6fb/MbLMt4vjAegv85iSCUgXntSA== X-Received: by 10.28.13.16 with SMTP id 16mr3105231wmn.101.1487261855677; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 08:17:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: jblunck@gmail.com Received: by 10.28.58.18 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 08:17:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170216133657.GB14695@dhcp-whq-twvpn-1-vpnpool-10-159-157-38.vpn.oracle.com> References: <1478504326-68105-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <83319780-26e9-afb6-74cd-20c07dad04a7@intel.com> <1915354.hxpEe7tUeI@xps13> <20170216133657.GB14695@dhcp-whq-twvpn-1-vpnpool-10-159-157-38.vpn.oracle.com> From: Jan Blunck Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:17:34 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: u6iRtgiCvNwG42jXkunWBriUj5U Message-ID: To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: Thomas Monjalon , "Tan, Jianfeng" , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , dev , Bruce Richardson , Yuanhan Liu , Xen-devel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] maintainers: claim responsability for xen 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, 16 Feb 2017 16:17:36 -0000 On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 12:06:18PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> >> Any news about Xen dom0 status in DPDK? >> >> I think there is not enough interest for Xen dom0 in the DPDK community. >> Last time we talked about, it was because of a severe bug which is not >> fixed yet: >> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044207.html >> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044376.html >> >> The request (6 month ago) was to give more time for feedbacks: >> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044847.html >> >> Is it time now to officially remove Dom0 support? > > So we do have an prototype implementation of netback but it is waiting > for review of xen-devel to the spec. > > And I believe the implementation does utilize some of the dom0 > parts of code in DPDK. FWIW I've also tested the 16.11 code in a Xen PV domU with uses the xen_dom0 module due to the lack of hugepages.